Archive for the 0 Brains Category

Monsturd (watched 1/6/10)

Posted in 0 Brains with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on 01/13/2010 by schlockfest

Happy New Year, and here’s to hoping that Monsturd isn’t indicative of what we’ll be watching for the next 12 months. This was a big night. We were saying goodbye to Gamera, aka Lindsay, we welcomed two new schlockers to the group (well until they watched this), and the highlight of the evening was an argument on whether Monsturd or The Mad was a worse movie. I hands down believed this one was worse. Jake said that due to budget and cast the letdown of The Mad made it worse, but I swear in the background Luke was muttering to himself “why? why do I come?”

There’s really not a lot to say here. The monster was actually kind of nice, however the rest of the movie was shot like a porn minus the sex. There were sparse sets, locations that made no sense, and dialogue that played out like actors who were more concerned about being fluffed than intonation. That said, aside from the quote on the cover from Rue Morgue advising to the contrary, this movie wasn’t something I expected a lot from. The only real question it left me with is: who the hell did the director know to get this thing on Netflix On Demand?

I’ve read some reviews that say it moves beyond potty jokes and poopy one liners. However, when one of the central characters is Jack Schmidt (as in “You don’t know Jack Schmidt?”) and one of the final scenes involves diapered heroes I can’t say that it does. The movie did have a few opportunities, but it never went far enough. The diapered heroes are still wearing pants. Why? The Turd monster actually looks really good, but it’s only on screen for a sum total of 20 seconds. Why? You could have made a really decent 25 minute movie, but it’s 80 minutes long. Why?!

I’d suggest watching the trailer on youtube. You get the gist minus the lost minutes of your life.

What it has: a ten year old narrator, flies, poop, pepto bismol, the ability to keep people from coming back to schlock night (in Jude’s words: This movie makes me want to mark your email address as spam)

What it’s missing: a reason for me to write anymore about it

.5/5 refillable tequila bottles

Deathbed (Tried to watch 9/30/01)

Posted in 0 Brains with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on 10/01/2009 by schlockfest

We have a schlock night first: we took out a movie and put in a new one. Here’s the problem (please don’t repeat it) we thought we were watching Death Bed: The Bed that Eats (1977) what we got was Stuart Gordon’s myopic piece of trash Deathbed (2002). Now if your a brilliant individual like Lucio Fulci you can follow up Argento’s Zombi (a remix of Romero’s Dawn of the Dead) with Zombi 2 because you’ll give your viewers their money’s worth. Or reuse the name Black Sheep because if you thought Chris Farley was funny you’re gonna be even happier when zombie sheep show up in your movies by mail. However, if you’re a shoddy director trying to lure schlock seekers in with plagiarized title you should be nailed to the bare walls you recorded your lame ass movie against. We hate you Stuart Gordon. In fact I might rename this blog Stuart Gordon Sucks. Fortunately we had a copy of Fulci’s The Beyond

Could be good... we'll see.

Could be good... we'll see.

Avoid this one!

Avoid this one!

around. See it’s review and tune in soon for the review of the true Death Bed: The Bed that Eats.

Why it sucked: They didn’t water the plants on set, the walls had nothing on them, it looked more like a bad porn set (without the porn), nobody was even remotely interesting

Why it didn’t suck: on our copy the audio track was off by a second and it was fun to watch the actors/actresses lips move and then wonder what would actually be said.

.5 (half)/5 a lame director