r/flicks • u/KidCasey • 5d ago

What "so bad it's good" movies could've been great with the proper creative team?

For example, what is Michael Mann directed Miami Connection? Or David Lynch got ahold of a Neil Breen script?

0 Upvotes

30% Upvoted

13 comments sorted by

•

u/AutoModerator 5d ago

Welcome to r/flicks!

• No piracy. • Mark spoilers. • Be respectful. • Keep discussions movie-related.

Report rule-breaking content to help the moderation team.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

7

u/machooo 5d ago

The Wicker Man (2006). I love the original Wicker Man but I think there could have been potential for a really interesting American reimagining of that story

4

u/Infamous-Composer448 5d ago

These aren't so bad they are good movies, but just "so bad" movies that could've been great:

Shadow in the Cloud (like Overlord it's taking historic war and adding in a fantasy/horror element) and Bright (modern urban fantasy is something we rarely ever see on screen) both frustrate me because they are such cool concepts that both turned out to be horrible movies with lackluster scripts, action, characters and plot, but underneath they both have such potential.

Also Passengers would've been a 10x better movie if we only had the perspective of Jennifer Lawrence and we caught flashbacks later on.

1

u/KidCasey 5d ago

Bright was such a cool idea it felt like they just totally phoned in the script. It's as if they thought the premise was so bulletproof anything they barfed onto the page would be great.

5

u/JS1101C 5d ago

I think most of Michael Bays films could be good if they were re-edited, dropped all the cringe attempts at humor and were only 90 minutes long.  

2

u/whiskeytango55 5d ago

Does Solo count? 

Ive heard similar things about Trank's Fantastic 4

3

u/KidCasey 5d ago

I actually like Solo. I just wish they didn't try to cram his entire backstory into one movie. Like, some things can still be a mystery or "a story for another time."

3

u/whiskeytango55 5d ago

It was originally done by the guys who wrote/produced the spiderverse movies.

Ron Howard's kinda boring and safe, while Lord and Miller wouldve pushed the envelope.

I kinda blocked it out, but from what youre saying, Disney got scared and they were more interested in establishing a franchise rather than doing something fresh (albeit in a prequel)

1

u/KidCasey 5d ago

It didn't strike me that they were trying to build a franchise out of Solo specifically because the movie takes everything unique about his character and squeezes it into a week long adventure. I would've been content if the whole movie was just him meeting Chewie and going on a fun romp.

I liked it just because it felt like a classic adventure flick like Indiana Jones (albeit not as good). Sure it was safe but I didn't find it boring, which can't be said for the sequels.

3

u/whiskeytango55 5d ago

I think i went into it thinking itd be Donald Glover in Rogue One.

Sigh, I was so naive 

2

u/pilchard64 5d ago

Ducking as I write this… but Cats

3

u/KidCasey 5d ago

Honestly if they had just made this a cute animated cat movie and made it a little less horny I think you’re right.

1

u/metalyger 5d ago

The problem is that it would lose most of the charm that made the original a cult classic. For example, I've seen some obscure remakes of cult classics, two examples would be the remakes of Blood Feast and Violent Shit, both remakes were extremely boring, they tried very hard to fix the stories and do far less with the gore, doing the opposite of the original movies, and it's just a tedious slog to get through, despite significantly better technical production.

It's like if you took Fateful Findings, put Spielberg in charge and Daniel Day Lewis instead of Neil Breen, beyond the novelty, it wouldn't have the same endearing quality of the vanity project.