RiffTrax Forum
 

Worst foursquell

Started by Doctor Who?, March 29, 2009, 09:53:54 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Doctor Who?

Also it wasn't the forth movie made,it was the first.

Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck

Yeah, careful.....you'll have Hollywood start releasing the first movie in a franchise and naming it "Fill-In-The-Blank 4" and numbering them backward.

Then they can claim years later, "See, they got better as they went along!"

Doctor Who?

Isn't that how the movie companies in 1984 work?

Wow!

Jaws is winning.

Rude

...

Hellraiser is an action movie franchise?

-Rude
"I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."http://www.divshare.com/flash/audio?myId=3942804-0e3

Doctor Who?

Well I have never seen a hellraiser movie(don't even know what it is)so when someone asked me to list it I listed it.

ScottotD

Didn't one of the producers actually apologize for HR4?

A Jaws 4 review from mid-90's Australian TV


Scottotd on Instagram

"A thing I like that there was no chance would ever continue until recently is now continuing but it doesn't meet my exact personal specifications so fuck this"

- how I read any complaint about MST3k (or Star Wars or Ghostbusters)

gojikranz

mothra vs godzilla is the greatest fourquell around.  lots think its the best godzilla movie period (aside from the original). 

im going with superman 4 though i admit i havent seen jaws 4  i mean indy 4 is citizen kane compared to nuclear man.
MICROPHONE MANIAC COMING SOON!!
Promo Featurette: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vzYR6_-UqE

Relaxing Dragon

Hey, shouldn't Batman and Robin be one of the options?

Doctor Who?


Relaxing Dragon

Ah, quite right, I must've spaced over it for some reason :-[

bratpop

Most fourquels are made as an afterthought by one or more different people than the previous films.

The exception should be the fourth Twilight, but we'll just have to wait for that little gem.

Actually I think Harry Potter 4 is fucking abyssmal. All the guys have long hair, the director sucked, and they cut up the book like it was collage fodder. And I like ALL the other Potters so far, the new one looks to be no exception. That's far worse than an arbitrarily bad part 4 in a series with a lot of other bad movies (Jaws 2, 3, Batman Forever, Superman III, Lethal Weapon any, Die Hard, 2, 3, Hellraiser 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10).

Trumpysgirl

Quote from: doggans on March 29, 2009, 10:34:49 AM
Plus, since the film takes place the year *before* "Raiders", it creates an obnoxious continuity error...WHY doesn't Indy "believe in magic, a lot of superstitious hocus pocus"?

Also, WHY doesn't Indy have scars on his back from when he was whipped when he takes off his shirt in Raiders? That has always bugged me.

However, I have to say that I do enjoy watching Temple, it's campy essence is what draws me in. Compared to Willie, the kid is a walk in the park. I'd take him over her screaming self-centered crap any day.
Dammit, Maverick! Why don't you play by the rules?!

"Joel, what's a Harringway?"
"About a pound."

bratpop

Does anything in the movie say it takes place before Raiders?

Trumpysgirl

I do believe that Steven confirmed it.
Dammit, Maverick! Why don't you play by the rules?!

"Joel, what's a Harringway?"
"About a pound."

bratpop

Well good for Steven, but my childhood says he's a liar.