Less whistling. and fewer bridges. and the only accents were hispanic (it features the US military, afterall) but other than that, just like that bridge movie.

Less whistling and fewer bridges. :lol:

Funny!

In a military movie, the strategies and techniques would be important to get right. This was a HUGE FAILURE of this movie. The military aspects actually made no sense, even to a casual observer.

Flint, that movie was tactical bullshit. it was strategically inept. the weapons systems employed were wrong. even the way the common M4 is used was wrong.

Then again, 6 shooters didn't need to be reloaded until the pivotal scene when John Wayne needed to jump off his horse and use his fists.

Mel Gibson started shooting in Lethal Weapon 1 and didn't reload until Lethal Weapon 4.

Bruce Willis crawled through hundreds of yards of ventilation shaft that has all the screws and cut sheet metal pointing in and he came out a little dirty.

William Shatner had more hair as an Admiral than he had as a Captain.

Suspend your disbelief and enjoy the ridiculous, you might enjoy it.

It is the movie maker's responsibility to facilitate the viewing experience be POSSIBLE to enjoy. They failed at every single step. Not one thing did they fail to screw up so glaringly that it totally, irreversibly put me into "meta" mode.

I can't remember the last time I just turned a movie off. It offered nothing. Not even a scrap.

I wasn't expecting much--I love "bad" movies, and I am fully capable of putting myself into the premise that is the movie maker's vision.

This was a failure of execution.

Rewatched 28 Weeks Later the other night.
I enjoyed it when I watched it (I'm partisan when it comes to UK films that take on big Hollywood themes) but rewatching it - OMG.

I expect a film like that to sacrifice story for gore, but the plot holes! You could bury all of the infected and STILL have room to seal them in molten lead.

But to me, that shows the film worked. I didn't notice this when I first saw it at the cinema. It carried me along with it.

I'd find it hard to appreciate any film that left me scoffing in its wake.

I saw Battle LA in a giant theater packed with people all enjoying the stupidity and laughing and cheering with it. It was LOUD. That probably had a lot to do with my enjoyable experience.

No doubt it would be... measurably better to a degree, viewed in a theater.

I know what you are talking about though. Face Off and Passenger 57 were so bad I turned them off back in the day.

3rd Indiana Jones was so awful I walked out of the theater. I couldn't waste another precious minute of my life, not watching that drivel, anyway.

The Last Crusade was Great!!!! The last one was complete crap though.

I think the worst film I ever saw was Interview With a Vampire. My (ex) husband and I would go to cinema at least once a week and he thought I'd want to see it because I loved vampires. In fact I'd hated the book. So I went for him and he went for me. And when it started, I stayed for him and he stayed for me.

At this remove I honestly don't remember if we made it through the film, but both of us were bored and hating it. The story would end better if I remembered the end.

However I did walk out of Fame - the Musical. It had many good reviews, but I found the script laughable and the songs barely memorable. We went as a work group and the two of us absconded even before the interval. My colleague was gay and we went to a great bar. We had a great night.

Interview with Brad Pitt was a horrible steaming pile of a movie. The books however, are outstanding.

I've only walked out of two movies.

Jurassic Park 2 (Had projector problems and was boring anyway)
Mixed Nuts with Steve Martin. (The first 30 minutes were so bad, we just got up and left.)

Had I gone to see The Core at the theater, it would have been my first ever walkout.