Only an idiot would expect a fifth Die Hard movie directed by the guy who did Max Payne and Flight of the Phoenix to be any good, but it’s still impressive the degree to which it’s been able to limbo under even the lowest of low expectations. And you need only read reviews for 5 Fast 5 Furious or The Last Stand to see how willing critics are to praise a film just for fulfilling the basement-level expectations set by their own marketing. While only seven reviews are in so far (and I made Laremy a deal where I’d have to see this if he’d see Inside the Mind of Charles Swan, so look forward to that), A Good Day to Die Hard is currently pitching a perfect Bucky Larson. For the uninitiated, that’s like a knuckleball that no one can hit because it’s so sucky.

Everything that made the first “Die Hard” memorable — the nuances of character, the political subtext, the cowboy wit — has been dumbed down or scrubbed away entirely. -AO Scott, NY Times

Loud and tedious, “Die Hard” 5 is a shaky-cam/Sensurround blast of bullets and bombs, digital explosions and death defying feats of defying death. Not a decent villain or catchphrase in it  -Roger Moore, McClatchy

Hired hack John Moore taps into the McClane mythology to drain any lingering humanity from the Die Hard series. -John Semley, Slant

A complete waste of time on every level. Loud, obnoxious, boring, cartoonish, morally reprehensible, and just plain stupid. -Brian Tallerico, HollywoodChicago

An asinine, immobile feature that’s dripping with trendy cinematography and toxic banter, while a visibly bored Bruce Willis hobbles through this dud, putting in the least amount of effort possible. -Brian Orndorf, Blu-Ray.com

There’s no artistry to Moore’s work, he’s simply a factory employee who knows how to work a punch press, and his take on the world of “Die Hard” is dispiriting and borderline offensive. -Brian Orndorf, Blu-Ray.com

I can’t decide which scenario is more exciting, Die Hard maintaining its perfect zero percent rating, or reading the barely-perceptible praise from the first critics to rate it “recommended.” On another note, I’m a little sad that so far, no one’s gone with the obvious New York Post-ready headline, “Ho Ho No.”

For the past few years, I’ve been convinced that Gerard Butler, Clive Owen, and Anna Faris are all in a contest to see which super-likable actor can ruin their career by choosing horrible projects the fastest. Gerard Butler may have just taken a slight lead with Playing for Keeps (co-starring Jessica Biel, pictured below, for obvious reasons), which is currently tracking 0% fresh on

…flat, hacky, unfunny dreck… with an uncomfortably flagrant misogynistic streak. -Christy LeMire, AP

“Playing for Keeps” isn’t content just to be a generic romantic comedy. nstead, not only is it not funny and not particularly romantic, it treats women like idiots. the script, by Robbie Fox, is lazy; characters disappear for long stretches (who can blame them?), only to show up again when some ridiculous plot contrivance requires it. Simply put, it’s a mess. -AZ Central

…a sloppy, poorly focused comedy -ReelReviews

You don’t often find a romantic comedy that has no idea what it’s supposed to be doing. -NOWToronto

The story is surprisingly – almost painfully – hackneyed, with the fine cast giving consistently one-dimensional turns. It is perplexing as to how such an unambitious, paint-by-numbers work got made. Actually, it is not even a current paint-by-numbers effort, because most contemporary romances involving once-connected-now-separated couples are a bit more sophisticated and worldly. -Austin Chronicle

Butler’s latest putrefying corpse is “Playing for Keeps,” a movie that answers the question: Is it possible for a sex farce and a family drama to be one and the same movie?
The answer is no. Contrived and phony from beginning to end. -St. Paul Pioneer Press

At the end of this embarrassing movie, you feel that the director has not only wasted the talents of half a dozen good actors, but has also wasted vast amounts of money–and our own precious time. -Emmanuel Levy

…a mushy-headed vehicle for what are supposed to be a lot of high-voltage star turns. Nothing much makes sense, but look at all the celebrities. -Canada.com

Having given Greer a pity screw and let Zeta-Jones wrap those Entrapment legs around his neck, Muccino insists the audience take George at face value when he assures Stacie—while she’s at the final fitting for the dress she intends to wear while marrying Mr. Safe Choice, like, tomorrow—that she was always the only one for him. Playing for Keeps (which went into production under the title Playing the Field, and the disparity between the two says everything about the movie’s emotional dissonance you need to know) is knee deep in “don’t hate the player, hate the game” territory, no more so than when George nearly loses it all in the 11th hour because of the one woman he didn’t f*ck. -Slant

Yeah, but what about when he fights the giant spider in the third act? Yeesh, there’s just no pleasing some people.

Read the rest of this entry »

Up until this weekend, the title of 2012’s top turd in the tank belonged to Katherine Heigl’s pitiful One for the Money, which is currently running at 2% on Rotten Tomatoes to make it one of the year’s worst films. But 39 terrible reviews and a pathetic $6.4 million opening weekend later, Eddie Murphy’s A Thousand Words is in the driver’s seat with a Bucky Larsonian 0% rating.

Sure, it’s still early in the year and the film’s box office run – and lord knows Armond White still needs to chime in – but enough critics have ripped this movie apart, that there’s a good chance that it could be declared… *cues dramatic music* the worst movie of all-time.

A Thousand Words is by no means the only film to receive a zero rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Other no-marks include the Adam Sandler-scripted sex comedy Bucky Larson: Born to Be a Star, the ham-fisted Pinocchio film by Roberto Benigni, and the disastrous adaptation of the Nicci French novel Killing Me Softly with Joseph Fiennes. A Thousand Words is unique, however, in having a significant amount of critics (30+) agree on the poor quality of a vehicle for a high-profile Hollywood star. (Via The Guardian)

It’s hard to put a finger on when exactly it happened, but at some point after Boomerang and The Distinguished Gentleman in 1992, someone let the air out of Murphy’s balloon and he just ran around Hollywood making a long farting noise. Hell, some people would even point to Harlem Nights in 1989 as the first tumble.

Read the rest of this entry »

Last Thursday, I told you about how Taylor Lautner’s new movie, Abduction, was well on its way to earning a zero percent rating on RottenTomatoes, or, as we call it, the full Bucky Larson (still 0% after 32 reviews, incidentally). But less than that 24 hours after my initial post, Abduction was already up to a robust THREE PERCENT RECOMMENDED on the strength of two positive reviews. Since we’re all about fairness and diversity of opinion here at FilmDrunk, I thought we’d examine those reviews to see what positive aspects may have been overlooked by the majority of critics, the be-ascotted asthmatic snootpocracy, if you will. (*puffs inhaler, re-fluffs ascot*)

Interestingly, the two “positive” reviews both come from the same site, an Australian publication called “Urban Cinefile.” The first positive review comes from Andrew L. Urban (oh, I get it now, “Urban” cinefile, it’s a play on words with his name. I was confused at first because I always assumed Australia had neither cities nor black people.). Funny thing is, it appears not to be  a review at all, but some kind of preview:

Review by Andrew L. Urban:
The notion of discovering a secret about yourself on the internet is a great premise on which to build a thriller, especially one whose central character is a teen. Twilight-launched Taylor Lautner gets his first genuine, gold plated leading role as Nathan, the teen who discovers that he was adopted by the people he thought were his parents.
Full review will be published on September 25

The full review still hasn’t been published, as far as I can tell, but he does seem pretty positive about the premise, which, to be fair, is no small feat, considering. Meanwhile, Urban’s partner, Louise Keller, did write a full review. Here are some quotes from that glowing recommendation.

Review by Louise Keller:
Taylor Lautner fans may not mind that his facial expressions are limited, or that the highly improbable script is peppered with inanities and corny dialogue.

“The acting was terrible and the script was idiotic, but the target audience was too stupid to notice. TWELVE STARS!”

The plot is so preposterous that the details hardly matter except to say that there are extravagant stunts, splashy action sequences and a taylor-made romance (sorry, couldn’t resist) between Lautner and Lily Collins, who is pretty as a picture.

“Look, don’t get me wrong, the script sucks. I’ll say it four times if I have to just to get my point across. It’s bad. Really, really bad. In fact, if you take one thing away from this review, let it be that the script is really, really, just atrociously f*cking bad. But I did get to make a pun using the lead’s name.”

There are tight close ups of their eyes and lips and in the train sequence, when they share their first lingering and passionate kiss, two crusty blokes with bald heads and tattoos sitting in the row in front of me roared with laughter when Lautner’s Nathan tells Collins’ Karen he’s starving.

I include the above excerpt only because I have no idea what the hell it means. They laugh because… he’s hungry? He’s kissing a girl? Anyone?

Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve been somewhat fascinated with Abduction (MORE LIKE ABS-DUCTION, LOL) almost since the beginning. I mean, I understand that different people like different things and all that, and that while I love dark comedy and hate musicals, millions are just the opposite… but this just seems confused. They basically took an actor that only girls like and put him in a premise that only guys like, and then brought in the director of Boyz in the Hood. Huh? Anyway, it opens this weekend, and the reviews are already starting to trickle in — mostly from overseas, where critical hate is much more passionate and colorful.

“Lautner isn’t much of an actor and behind his face is a brain ticking away at one kilometre per hour with the repetitive long-held close-ups of his face yielding no more emotional insights than the equally long close-ups of his stomach.” -Trespass Magazine

“We may never know if Abduction is satire or misfire, but I spent the entire film wracked by gales of choking laughter.” -The Vine

“Last I checked, tweenage girls weren’t too keen on this genre, and the boys who normally would be a fan will likely be disappointed by its bloodless, stagnant lameness.” -Quickflix

“Abduction features woefully appalling writing brought to life by genuinely random direction. The only consistency is that none of it works, and the result is a mess that will leave even the most ardent Twi-hater yearning for Stephenie Meyer’s skills. …one of the year’s worst films.” -Sydney Morning Herald

“Don’t be fooled by the presence of esteemed actors like Bello, Isaacs, Sigourney Weaver (playing Nathan’s shrink) and Alfred Molina (a dodgy CIA boss). They’re only there to collect a pay check for reading out the absurd script — which could have been written by a 14-year-old, given its level of depth and sophistication.
Oh, and at no point in the movie is anyone ever actually abducted, so presumably the title is a just subtle reference to Lautner’s notorious abs.” -Moviefix

Sounds like they liked it! But hey, I hate being such a Negative Norbit. That’s why it pleases me to report that Dolphin Tale is tracking almost 90%. DIDN’T I TELL YOU IT WAS GOING TO BE AWESOME? Morgan Freeman makes a robot tale for a dolphin! Wounded soldiers! MARINE BIOLOGIST HARRY CONNICK JR! My God, it has everything.