Two percent. Two. I can count to two with my legs. I repeat certain things twice because the second time you say something, it gives it more empahsis – it's usually funnier. I use number two pencils. I have two restrooms. The first number in my age is a two. I feel like I'm surrounded by twos. Which is why we felt the need to see this year's worst ranked movie, "Supercross: The Movie."
Yes, this movie about motorcycle racing – one that apparently felt the need to distinguish itself from all the other supercross-themed films, by adding "The Movie" to the title *#8211; has received the lowest ranking on Rotten Tomatoes this year... a 2% fresh rating. If you can see, one person out of 50 said it was good. One person. These are the same people that watched "XXX 2" and "Monster-in-Law," but they ranked them higher than this?
Well, did it deserve a two?
But in all honesty, this movie wasn't THAT bad. Yes, the acting was bad. Yes, the plot was pretty predictable. Yes, the girls were pretty darn cute, and pointless. But really, the show wasn't a two percent. You'd be hard pressed to make a two percent movie. Again, I remind you, these are the same people that watched "XXX 2" and "Monster-in-Law," and ranked them higher.
Like I mentioned, there was a TON of real racing footage, which hardly any other movie does these days. When the guys crashed, they crashed for real. Granted, you couldn't tell if the footage was taken for the movie, but we're going to assume it was... just for kicks. Nik and I were even kinda excited about the big final race.
I don't have much else to say about this. It was all over the board, goofy, bad story... but it wasn't a two percent. Did I like it, kinda, but not enough to see it ever again... unless we make a drinking game out of it – take a drink whenever someone ramps a dirt mound. Sounds fabulous.
+ original post date: August 25, 2005 09:58 PM
+ categories: Bad Movie Night
comments2
(comments rss feed)
[SPOILER ALERT] Seth really pretty much covered the bases with his review. However he described the plot as predictable. I'd call it thin instead.
There was one moment that went contrary to my prediction. During the big race in the middle of the movie I expected there to be a dilemna of loyalties pitting brother against brother. That did not happen.
I consider the plot to be thin because the story could be told in about three sentences. Also because plot points were brought up but never used. For instance there is the father who is dead, and there is hint that he died tragically. But they never do anything with this and in the end there is really no reason to have even brought up the father at all.
I really hoped this would be worse than "Gigli" but it wasn't. The dialogue was weak but it wasn't corny and it fit the characters. The movie is basically an excuse to show racing and it does that well. Fans of the sport won't be disappointed, so the movie, in my mind, succeeds.
+ author: ScooterJ
+ posted: August 26, 2005 11:34 AM
I forgot to mention. For me the only truly dumb element was that K.C. took a job as a wingman and then got upset that it meant he had to take the fall to heelp out the guy he was wingman for. You don't apply for the job of wingman if you want to be the one to take home the prize.
+ author: ScooterJ
+ posted: August 26, 2005 11:39 AM
post a comment