Oh, No You Didn't! (A Chronicle of "Bad" Film)

[Sycophant]

Oh, No You Didn't!
a chronicle by Sycophant

Word has it that life is too short to watch bad movies, read bad music, or listen to bad books. Truly, we're going to die before we'll ever take it all in, so one's left to wonder why we shouldn't be constantly immersing ourselves in the best of the best. Accept the canon, watch the collected works of Godard, Welles, and Kurosawa. What use is there for everything else? Watch everything that gets nominated for an Academy Award and the top ten in the end-of-year film critics' polls.

I don't know about you, but I start feeling a little silly when I've got nothing but three-to-four star films in my signature. After a spate of films like Tokyo Story and Days of Heaven and Jaws, sometimes I'm left feeling a deficit in perspective. Sure, Days of Heaven is a great film, but apparently everything I've been watching lately is. That's when I know I need to mix it up and take a chance. For we must be able to discern the good from the bad.


http://whatnot.bombdotcom.net/shit/adamandeve.jpg

But who says it needs to be bad? That's part of my mission here: to discover things largely written off that have some redeeming value. Of course, they may actually suck, but there's value to be found in examining what makes films falter.

I'm not merely seeking out "bad" films to watch bad films. Believe me--watching bad films is something I do not enjoy. I'm very nearly impervious to the concept of camp. And I don't believe at all in the "So bad, it's good!" mentality. I can't comprehend that. For you to understand where I'm coming from here, understand the following:

1. Barbarella is utter shit.
2. Gigli is good, occasionally exhibiting genius.
3. Severance made my stomach churn.
4. Crank rocks my socks (off?).

Also, some of this stems from the guilt I feel for making cheap jabs at films I haven't seen. Despite the fact that it was moderately well-received, I'm going to be including Moliere as a future entry. Lord, I was merciless to that film before it was released.

What criteria will I use to decide what goes in this section? If a movie scores lower than 33% on the Tomatometer, it's eligible. Failing that, it's entirely in my perception. What I seek out is going to largely be influenced by what I feel most exposed to. The idea for this project began when a friend of mine tried to talk me out of renting I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry, a film we'd rather enjoyed deriding in its pre-release.

It's essential to broaden one's (or at least my) horizons. I'm going to slap something together for I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry in a couple minutes here. Then I'm going to watch Ghost Rider. Report to follow.

[Melville]

read bad music, or listen to bad books.
Awesome. This thread should be great.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Awesome idea. Consider me subscribed.

[Rowland]

For you to understand where I'm coming from here, understand the following:

1. Barbarella is utter shit.
2. Gigli is good, occasionally exhibiting genius.
3. Severance made my stomach churn.
4. Crank rocks my socks (off?).
I'm not sure what this is supposed to prove, but okay. I thought iosos and I were the only Crank fans around here, cool to see another. Speaking of camp, Crank could very easily pass as such.

[Sycophant]

I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry
Directed by Dennis Dugan. Written by Barry Fanaro and Alexander Payne & Jim Taylor. 2007.

http://whatnot.bombdotcom.net/shit/inowpronounceyouchuckandlarry. jpg

There sure is an inordinate amount of focus on firefighting minutia, I thought to myself as I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry began. It wasn't a certain amount of time had passed that it dawned on me that firefighters are well-fetishized in gay circles. I noticed, actually, a fair amount of parallels being drawn between the extremes of both homosexual and heterosexual behaviors. Something in the text here was going beyond what I'd expected of this sure-to-be-shitty movie.

Now, Dennis Dugan is not one I'd brand an interesting director. His style is borderline non-existent and scarcely above television. He certainly doesn't do much to comment on his material. I don't expect Dugan set out to do more with most of the movie than just tell hyeelarious Adam Sandler jokes. Another thing that dawned on me while watching this film: after Punch-Drunk Love, this is the only Sandler vehicle I've suffered all the way through.

Strangely, the film's heart is in the right place. The script (which has surely seen more hands than the three credited scribes) had the potential to be terribly offensive. Among my circle of friends, there was much wild speculation as to what exactly the film would do to offend with a bunch of ridiculous gay panic jokes, only to culminate in a Hollywood brand impotent, wishy-washy "like people even though it's totally funny to laugh at them for being gay, fat, short, or whatever" message. We really couldn't have been more wrong. Rather, the movie pretty much bludgeons its audience with pro-gay rights stance, indulging in gay panic and homophobia only to hold it up as risible hysteria. In a way, the film is nearly laudable just for being so darned friendly.

It even manages to hit some nice points on the ludicrous status of benefits issues and needlessly complicated bureaucracy.

Surprisingly, Kevin James gives a pretty honest, decent performance. Most of Sandler's straight man-slut escapades fall flat, his conversion to monogamy at the end even moreso. Rob Schneider's what-the-fuck Asian wedding minister is gut-wrenchingly unfunny. And that, really is the film's downfall: it's not funny.

With the exception of a deliciously over the top appearance near the end of the picture from Richard Chamberlain as a city councilman (that actually necessitated a pause while I caught my breath from one of the biggest surprise guffaws I've ever coughed up), the film's pretty much mirthless. It's trying hard, but it's long been established that the Sandler school of comedy doesn't work for me. What jokes there are that work on paper pretty much don't work because they're neither delivered nor captured in a complementary way. It's always interesting to recognize a joke that you see was meant to be there, but gets misinterpreted in execution It's a pity, because with another revision (or rescinded revision) or two and a more insightful director (one who isn't a Sandler veteran), this could've been a funny film, instead of just one well-intentioned.

[Sycophant]

I'm not sure what this is supposed to prove, but okay. I thought iosos and I were the only Crank fans around here, cool to see another. Speaking of camp, Crank could very easily pass as such.Yeah, that was a little disjointed, sorry. Barbarella was invoked to bring up the "So bad, it's good!" argument that I hate putting up with. Gigli was an example of the publicly dismissed good film (Crank as well, but also to, yes, address camp). Severance... was there for a fourth. :P

But yeah, I'm a total Crank convert. My love doesn't match iosos's, but it's a damn good film.

[Sycophant]

OH GOD WHY IS GHOST RIDER OVER TWO HOURS LONG?!

[megladon8]

OH GOD WHY IS GHOST RIDER OVER TWO HOURS LONG?!

:)

[Spinal]

After a spate of films like Tokyo Story and Days of Heaven and Jaws, sometimes I'm left feeling a deficit in perspective.

This statement and your mad quest remind me of this Spinal Tap exchange:

"It really puts perspective on things though doesn't it?"

"Well too much - there's too much fucking perspective now!"

[D_Davis]

House of the Dead!

[Spinal]

I was going to suggest A Hole in My Heart, but I see that it is actually at 41% on the Tomatometer. Not nearly as bad as I might have guessed.

HOWEVER ...

Anatomy of Hell is 26%. :)

[Rowland]

I Know Who Killed Me?

[Sycophant]

Ghost Rider
Written & directed by Mark Steven Johnson. 2007.

http://whatnot.bombdotcom.net/shit/ghostrider.jpg

NOTE: I'm going to spoil a bunch of stuff.

I have no idea what the hell kind of movie Ghost Rider was supposed to be, but even from that position, I still think I've got a leg up on writer/director Mark Steven Johnson. I never did see Johnson's Daredevil, but generally gave it the benefit of the doubt when people told me it was misjudged and underrated. Still, after its terrible flop status, I'd assumed he would never get another break like he did at a major studio picture, let alone adapting Marvel characters again. I'm much, much more wary of Daredevil.

The structure of the picture is a mess. Its first twenty minutes are spent before the story starts properly in a very broadly told story of teen angst and love. Literally, Johnny Blaze carves his and his girlfriend's initials in a tree, turns around, and she tells him she's leaving town. Wow. That was actually a little impressive.

Flash forward to the future. The first fifteen minutes of this segment are spent with ridiculous, golden flashbacks to stuff we saw as little as five minutes ago. A friend of mine likes to call this storytelling for "the slows." I don't know if I've met anyone that slow. Naturally, the love interest from his youth resurfaces as a tonally inconsistent world famous reporter that will shriek like a little girl, show the mature sympathy of la belle, and have her obligatory half-assed girl power moment. It builds this love interest, but it only really does that to have two breasts to stand around and motivate the protagonist into action he probably doesn't have control over anyway. Or does he? I could never figure that out.

The romance is so perfunctory, and it stands in sick contrast to Johnny Blaze's, uh, roadie or business manager or technical adviser or something... at any rate, his name's Mack and he's apparently Johnny's only friend. Mack is nonchalantly killed--with nary a wince from either the film or Johnny--about thirty minutes from the end.

That brings into sharp focus one of the many problems with the film: there are no stakes. Roxie and Johnny are going to survive because they're going to. Ghost Rider will always be Ghost Rider because he has to be. He can't lose a fight, because he can't. Every time one of the weird elemental side-villains seems to have our hero does something we didn't realize he could do that makes no goddamn sense. The rules are made up from shot to shot. If there's any internal logic in this film, I can't find it.

Back to the genre confusion: Personal drama is abandoned in the first hour. There's hardly enough fun for this to be even a dark, campy comedy. And it's certainly not an action film (thought that's where your local video store will shelve it). It's a problem with a number of American studio products posturing themselves as action films: there's no fighting. Battles are decided by our bad guy initiating an attack against Ghost Rider. Ghost Rider pauses, then retaliates with the aforementioned something we didn't realize he could do. What I would give to see some punches and some fight choreography.

Is it ludicrous to complain about the moral palette in a film like this? Ghost Rider employs a move called Penance Stare (visualized in the worst visual effects attempt at a trip I've seen in a while) on some random mugger. At this point, I thought he was under the devil's control (oh yeah, he works for the devil because he signed a contract by accident), but this was soon celebrated as a heroic task. Everyone is apparently quite neatly categorized into "innocent" or "guilty," and it's pretty simple to make the distinction. Hilariously, the only black character (or extra) in the film (and apparently in all of Texas or wherever this was set) is an "innocent" in the jail.

Part of the blame for this pathetic clusterfuck of a movie must belong to the source material. Superhero comics aren't my forte, but I can't imagine this character or his ill-defined universe working well, like, at all.

There are precisely three good things about this movie:

1. Nicolas Cage shaking and drinking from a martini glass full of jelly beans.
2. Nicolas Cage and his Carpenters dependency.
3. Nicolas Cage enjoying stupid monkey videos way too much.

http://whatnot.bombdotcom.net/shit/ghostrider3.jpg

These things are all behind us in the first half hour, though. Okay, Sam Elliot's always nice to have around (and in this movie, he's exactly who you think he is and it's so not a reveal that it made me kind of sad), but that's all he really is: around.

[transmogrifier]

One word:

Tomcats

[Sycophant]

House of the Dead!
Sure.

Anatomy of Hell is 26%. :)
Okay.

I Know Who Killed Me?
On it! (Actually had this one in mind.)

One word:

Tomcats
I'm scared.

[transmogrifier]

I'm scared.

[whispery psycho voice]You shhhould be.[/whispery psycho voice]

[Derek]

Among all the things so very, very wrong with Ghost Rider, I'm always left remembering how monumentally and hilariously awful Wes Bentley was. He was so bad, he had me thinking Eva Mendes was decent for a while, and that's a real feat.

Also, do you remember the details of the flashback to his father he had before the big jump? I know I found it amusing as it was a clear moment for "the slows" as you call them.

My favorite part about seeing this in the theater was the woman who not only answered her cell phone, but talked on it for a full 5 minutes. Normally one of us would have said something or gotten a manager (which someone eventually did), but we all found it incredibly amusing to watch the few people in the theater actually enjoying the film get their panties in a wad. It was easily the most entertaining 5 minutes of the film.

[Sycophant]

Also, do you remember the details of the flashback to his father he had before the big jump? I know I found it amusing as it was a clear moment for "the slows" as you call them.
Oh, yes. This film is still a steaming fresh memory in my mind. It's amazing, 'cause the what's being referenced happened maybe fifteen minutes ago and the dialog really, really has it covered. It would even have it well covered if you cut out the first twenty minutes.


My favorite part about seeing this in the theater was the woman who not only answered her cell phone, but talked on it for a full 5 minutes. Normally one of us would have said something or gotten a manager (which someone eventually did), but we all found it incredibly amusing to watch the few people in the theater actually enjoying the film get their panties in a wad. It was easily the most entertaining 5 minutes of the film.Awesome. :)

The best moment of Enchanted was when a four-ish girl in front of me in the theater leaned over to her mother about halfway through the film and asked "This movie is called Enchanted, isn't it?" When her mother responded in the affirmative, the girl couldn't contain her pride.

[MadMan]

Dare I suggest something along the lines of Manos: Hands of Fate or Angry Red Planet? :twisted:

Also Barbarella is good campy fun I tell you. Trippy, crazy, insane fun, but also a pointed observation of the 60s sex revolution among other things.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I nominate Pinocchio with Roberto Benigni. It has a 0% on RT, so I believe it qualifies.

[Velocipedist]

Word has it that life is too short to watch bad movies, read bad music, or listen to bad books.

'Tis true.

[Raiders]

Dude, Glen or Glenda. I consider it a legitimately great film, but many consider it incoherent shit. You HAVE to include that one.

[Velocipedist]

Dare I suggest something along the lines of Manos: Hands of Fate :twisted:

YES! YES, and precisely because it is an amazing movie! I'm not joking.


Dude, Glen or Glenda. I consider it a legitimately great film, but many consider it incoherent shit. You HAVE to include that one.

Now..., this is another story. Whereas Manos was spectacular, the other oft-mentioned "so bad it's good" movie, Ed Wood's Plan 9 from Outer Space was entirely disposable. Campy, but not hilarious, wrong, but boring. It's the only one of his that I've seen, and a friend who also dislikes it loves Glen, so thanks for the reminder, I need to see that!

Anyway, back to Manos, good phrasing - a legitimately great film!

[Raiders]

YES! YES, and precisely because it is an amazing movie! I'm not joking.

...

Anyway, back to Manos, good phrasing - a legitimately great film!

I have seen Manos without MST3K, I assure you it is the most incompetent film ever made. Legitimately great? Are you actually being serious? You must explain this to me.

[Scar]

Escape From The Blood Plantation

Brando's Island of Dr. Moreau

Soldier

[Velocipedist]

I have seen Manos without MST3K, I assure you it is the most incompetent film ever made. Legitimately great? Are you actually being serious? You must explain this to me.

I, too, have seen Manos without MST3K and I, too, know it is the most incompetent film ever made. Heck, Harold P. Warren was into fertilizer before he did it. I like to say he was into manure after he did it. :)

Think of Eraserhead. A plot which (apparently) makes no sense, filmed with (some) technical knowledge. Manos has a plot which, indeed, makes no sense, filmed with no technical knowledge. It's the only difference. The characters were clueless, but the people who made the film were also clueless, and it shows! You see, making a movie is, just like (an orchestra) playing a symphony, a great example of enormous human cooperation, be it in the good, the bad or the ugly. In that respect, the cast&crew and everything the movie was trying to be were on the same wavelength, resulting in one of the most genuinely scary movies I've seen.

It's just the purest example of meta-cinema.

This is not a joke. And yes, I just compared Manos: The Hands of Fate to Eraserhead. I went there.

[dreamdead]

Give a heads-up when you're thinking about doing Norbit and I'll queue that sucker up; I ain't gonna watch it unless there's someone to discuss it with (wow, that's a lot of grammatical errors right there).

[Raiders]

I, too, have seen Manos without MST3K and I, too, know it is the most incompetent film ever made. Heck, Harold P. Warren was into fertilizer before he did it. I like to say he was into manure after he did it. :)

Think of Eraserhead. A plot which (apparently) makes no sense, filmed with (some) technical knowledge. Manos has a plot which, indeed, makes no sense, filmed with no technical knowledge. It's the only difference. The characters were clueless, but the people who made the film were also clueless, and it shows! You see, making a movie is, just like (an orchestra) playing a symphony, a great example of enormous human cooperation, be it in the good, the bad or the ugly. In that respect, the cast&crew and everything the movie was trying to be were on the same wavelength, resulting in one of the most genuinely scary movies I've seen.

It's just the purest example of meta-cinema.

This is not a joke. And yes, I just compared Manos: The Hands of Fate to Eraserhead. I went there.

Well, I do agree the uniform level of incompetence in the film is genuinely terrifying.

[Ezee E]

Sycophant may be saying that "life is too short for bad movies", so he's getting an idea of what hell is like a little early.

[Boner M]

I don't watch nearly enough bad films. The worst I can think of in recent memory is perhaps Gothika. Wow, that was an unpleasant mess.

[Sven]

Give a heads-up when you're thinking about doing Norbit and I'll queue that sucker up; I ain't gonna watch it unless there's someone to discuss it with (wow, that's a lot of grammatical errors right there).

I've seen it.

[Yxklyx]

I would recommend Little Man (Keenen Ivory Wayans).

[Yxklyx]

I don't think using RT by itself is a good idea. I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry is rated 6.3 on IMDB which isn't that bad. RT tends to get a more mainstream crowd and this crowd may not like movies that are a bit different.

I actually sat through all of Little Man and somehow gave it a 2/10. IMDB rating is 3.2 and RT is 14%.

Manos is awful, boring, etc... a waste of time.

Plan 9 is hardly every boring. Unintentionally funny in so many spots.

[Russ]

I got this one from another site, but I think this thread can be summed up in two words:

Samurai Cop

Need proof?

The chase scene (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX9y0iNuCcM)
The horny nurse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6gk04xzN3U)

[lovejuice]

Samurai Cop


so it's sorta lethal weapon knock off. it's actually very interesting when you think about it. how close it is that the first lethal weapon can end up like samurai cop. i don't think for the first movie, donner has that much budget to burn, so in a way, this makes you really appreciate the talent of the guy.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I got this one from another site, but I think this thread can be summed up in two words:

Samurai Cop

Need proof?

The chase scene (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX9y0iNuCcM)
The horny nurse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6gk04xzN3U)

I have moved this to the top of my queue and notified my friends that it's time for another B-movie get together.

[D_Davis]

Seth, who writes for Genrebusters, spends most of his time collecting and watching these kinds of films. He's written reviews for hundreds of them. His column is called Garbage In, Garbage Out.

I'm sure if you peruse this link, you'll find all kinds of things to watch:

http://www.genrebusters.com/film/garbage_index.htm


Plus, no Bad Movie list is complete with out some Palonia Brothers films.

http://www.imdb.com/company/co0002754/

Try to check out:

Saurians
Peter Rotten Tail
Feeders 1
Feeders 2
Holla' if I Kill You
The House That Screamed

A lot of people claim to have seen the worst film ever, or the best bad film ever, but until you've seen Saurians, you really haven't seen anything, or even lived for that matter. Manos has nothing on this. It's basically Jurassic Park made for about $25.78, complete with toy dinos held up close to the camera using perspective to make them look big, and swear-to-God, Commodore 64 generated CGI. It's almost impossible to find, but once you do you will not regret the time or money spent on the endeavor.

This truly is the Holy Grail of so-bad-it's-good cinema.

I've watched it over 25 times.

[monolith94]

I won't claim it's the worst film ever, but the worst film I've ever seen is Blood Freak.

[Spun Lepton]

*cracks knuckles*

I seen a lotta bad movies in my day. I'll throw out only a few, because I don't want to attempt to corner the badness market.

Slugs
http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/coverv/46/165646.jpg
Stand out dialogue: "You're not fit to declare happy birthday!"

Dead Heat
http://www.avclub.com/content/files/images/dead-heat_.jpg
Yes, that's Joe Piscopo. You want bad, Joe knows bad.

Zombi Holocaust
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/19/Zombie_h_dvd.jpg/200px-Zombie_h_dvd.jpg
A quick warning, there is gallons and gallons of gore in this. But, the gore is terribly fake looking. Take that however you will. My favorite line was a part of my sig for a good, long time. "I could easily kill you now, but I'm determined to have your brain!"

Enjoy the suffering.

[Yxklyx]

War And Peace (1968) - A
484 minutes of Rusian epic drama, man oh man.
Sweeney Todd - B+
Blade Runner - A+
Darjeeling Limited - A
No Country For Old Men - A+
Khadak - A+
Lust, Caution - B+
Gone Baby Gone - A
The Nomi Song - A-

Someone needs to see a bad movie badly!

[MadMan]

A lot of people claim to have seen the worst film ever, or the best bad film ever, but until you've seen Saurians, you really haven't seen anything, or even lived for that matter. Manos has nothing on this. It's basically Jurassic Park made for about $25.78, complete with toy dinos held up close to the camera using perspective to make them look big, and swear-to-God, Commodore 64 generated CGI. It's almost impossible to find, but once you do you will not regret the time or money spent on the endeavor.

This truly is the Holy Grail of so-bad-it's-good cinema.

I've watched it over 25 times.That sounds like comedy gold. Seriously. I must view it, if only because it sounds gloriously awful and it reminds me of the cheesy videos my friend used to make using action figures. Heh.

To me Manos is absolutely wretched, awful, and just plain bad weirdness. Bad weirdness is really one of the worst things to watch on screen, because if you can't even make cool or good weirdness you really do suck. And yes I saw most of the film without the MSTK commentary. I don't know how I survived, but I did. I just starred at the screen in disbelief, wondering what the hell it was I was watching and noting that I was starting to lose critical brain cells.

[monolith94]

Someone needs to see a bad movie badly!

Yeah, I'm obviously going to have to let my girlfriend choose more movies at the rental store.

[lovejuice]

there's this thai film called bangkok love story or something which, i kid you not, is the unintentionally funniest film ever made. so bad. so ridiculous.

[Sycophant]

I Know Who Killed Me
Directed by Chris Sivertson. Written by Jeff Hammond. 2007.

http://whatnot.bombdotcom.net/shit/iknowwhokilledme.jpg

Entertainment creates celebrity. Celebrity becomes culture. Culture savages entertainment.

Some movies never given a chance to speak for themselves. Chances are that the reason that I Know Who Killed Me got made was the same reason it was so easy for so many to dismiss offhand: it landed Lindsay Lohan in its starring role. Gigli suffered a similar fate a few years ago. Not that I Know Who Killed Me is as good as Gigli. But it deserves its chance to be seen.

Lohan actually is a fine fit for the part. She has to wear two different characters without letting on to the audience whether they actually are. I suppose a lot could be (and apparently has been) said about the similarity between the duality of the Aubrey and Dakota characters and Lohan's own life and career, but I don't pay enough attention to comment, as I have at best an impression of an impression of an impression of an impression of her image.

The film is deeply flawed, but really sings in places. The story invests itself in several paths that ultimately lead us nowhere and not in a good red herring kind of way. The film isn't really about Aubrey's mother's reluctance to accept her daughter's sexuality and the more time we spend with a group of FBI agents, the more we realize how retarded that thread is. The filmmakers latch onto a visual motif that would be twice as smart if it were half as present.

Some parts are a little hokey, a little obvious, a little out of place. But the story begins to reveal itself as a horrific twist on teen fantasy, replete with clueless but well-meaning parents, a distrust of authority, the world on a platter, a daydream "what-if" alternate life and its accompanying personality schism.

The picture gets a lot of mileage out of a few key setpieces and images, like a stripper pole covered in blood. This genre isn't really tailor-made to my liking, but I still found myself entertained throughout with quite a few things to admire. I'd imagine that its public would have too, if they'd just given it a chance. Last week, the Razzies were announced and they heaped their sophomoric insults on this movie no one saw because it and its star were an easy target. Shame.

[Wryan]

A lot of people claim to have seen the worst film ever, or the best bad film ever, but until you've seen Saurians, you really haven't seen anything, or even lived for that matter. Manos has nothing on this. It's basically Jurassic Park made for about $25.78, complete with toy dinos held up close to the camera using perspective to make them look big, and swear-to-God, Commodore 64 generated CGI. It's almost impossible to find, but once you do you will not regret the time or money spent on the endeavor.

This truly is the Holy Grail of so-bad-it's-good cinema.

I've watched it over 25 times.

Here's the 10-star review on imdb. I added nothing:

"I was recommended by a good movie critic to watch Saurians. My first impression was WOW...decent story, pretty good special effects, but a wonderful cast and character development. Upon watching the movie for the fourth and fifth times, I was aching for some director commentary or extra features. I'll have to wait for the DVD i guess. Anyways, I would highly recommend this blockbuster to anyone thats interested in the genre of dinosaurs coming to life and killing people.

Coffee is good, but gives me the wet poops."

[Bosco B Thug]

http://whatnot.bombdotcom.net/shit/iknowwhokilledme.jpg Dude, I really like this still.

[Rowland]

Dude, I really like this still.The movie is brimming with De Palma-esque imagery like that. It's also chock full of embarrassingly blatant color symbolism (the blue... THE BLUE!).

I Know Who Killed Me isn't a particularly good movie, but I think it's more interesting than many of last year's more respectable releases. Kudos for giving it a fair shake, Syco.

[Bosco B Thug]

The movie is brimming with De Palma-esque imagery like that. It's also chock full of embarrassingly blatant color symbolism (the blue... THE BLUE!).
A lot of it is Lohan's enigmatic facial expression, too.

[Thirdmango]

Might I nominate and if you need a copy I've got one of...

Can't Stop The Music

[Watashi]

Some guy on RT (Sidney Falco) has I Know Who Killed Me on his top ten list for last year. He actually wrote a defense for it here (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=573264).

[lovejuice]

The movie is brimming with De Palma-esque imagery like that. It's also chock full of embarrassingly blatant color symbolism (the blue... THE BLUE!).

I Know Who Killed Me isn't a particularly good movie, but I think it's more interesting than many of last year's more respectable releases. Kudos for giving it a fair shake, Syco.

can you be so kind as to spoil the film for me? so are they actually the same person?

[Sycophant]

can you be so kind as to spoil the film for me? so are they actually the same person?Nope. They're separated-at-birth "stigmatic twins."