fuck snakes on a plane

So: word leaked in advance that a movie was going to be incredibly stupid and awful. Instead of having to go and see it and come out going, “man, that was awful, why did we waste our time and money?”, we know in advance, so surely we can just avoid it altogether as it will be shit?

The phenomena around it is weird only because the studio acknowledged its awfulness in advance, and was willing to get input from those who would otherwise mock and ignore it later.

I turn you over to the hopefully immortal wisdom of Bill Hicks:


But you know I saw this movie this year called last year called er, ‘Basic Instinct’. Okay now. Bill’s quick capsule review: Piece-of-Shit. Okay now. Yeah, yeah, end of story by the way. Don’t get caught up in that fevered hype phoney fucking debate about that Piece-of-Shit movie. “Is it too sexist, and what about the movies, are they becoming too dddddddd.” You’re, you’re just confused, you don’t get, you’ve forgotten how to judge correctly. Take a deep breath huuh, look at it again. “Oh it’s a Piece-of-Shit!” Exactly, that’s all it is. Satan squatted, let out a loaf, they put a fucking title on it, put it on a marquee, Satan’s shit, piece of shit, walk away. “But is it too, what about the lesbian connot.. ddddd.” You’re, you’re getting really baffled here. Piece-of-Shit! Now walk away. That’s all it is, it’s nothing more! Free yourself folks, if you see it, Piece-of-Shit, say it and walk away. You’re right! You’re right! Not those fuckers who want to tell you how to think! You’re fucking right! Sorry wrong meeting again. I keep getting my days mixed up. tomorrow, it’s the meeting at the docks. Tonight it’s comedy entertainment with young Bill. Horrible film. And then I come to find out after that film. that all the lesbian sex scenes, let me repeat that, all the lesbian sex scenes were cut out of that film, because the test audience was turned off by them. Ha. Boy, is my thumb not on the pulse of America.

Maybe I’m missing something. Or maybe it’s an overhyped piece of shit.

12 Responses to “fuck snakes on a plane”

  1.   Pearce
    August 31st, 2006 | 10:07 am


    Actually it got notice because it was called Snakes On A Plane and starred Samuel L. Jackson, and some wag a message board proposed the line “I am sick of all these motherfucking snakes on this motherfucking plane!” and people thought that was funny and it got posted everywhere. Jackson was tickled, and arranged to put the line into the movie after the fact.

    This all happened before the movie was even made. If “word leaked in advance that [it] was going to be incredibly stupid and awful” it either happened after the hype, or was based purely on the title. It’s also worth pointing out that the studio seems to have been initially blind to all the geek hype; they actually tried to change the title – the entire thing that the hype was based around – until Jackson intervened.

    I’m not denying that it’s probably crap, but your basic assumptions seem to be incorrect.

    Also, there were never lesbian sex scenes filmed for Basic Instinct; the director wanted to film some, but the writer talked him out of it on the grounds that they would be gratuitous. I’m actually inclined to believe that more people went to the movie to see Sharon Stone’s pussy than because of any controversy. [I could launch into a spirited defence of Basic Instinct, but will refrain – though I do think it’s as misunderstood as its director’s later Starship Troopers.]

  2.   vk
    August 31st, 2006 | 4:05 pm

    I think you might need a chill pill for this one. Snakes on a Plane is not trying to hide the fact that it is a B-grade movie. The whole point of it is to go along and have a laugh at how utterly silly it is 🙂 Its ok and I think its quite healthy.

  3.   Pearce
    August 31st, 2006 | 5:05 pm

    My only problem with things like Snakes On A Plane is that B-grade movies like this used to be made for $5 and some shoe polish, while big budgets were reserved for movies of relative quality.

    These days they spend hundreds of millions of dollars on the B-grade movies, and $5 and shoe polish goes to the quality films – if we’re lucky enough to get quality films.

  4. August 31st, 2006 | 5:08 pm

    No movie shall triumph over Snakes on a Plane. Unless I happen to feel like making a movie called More Motherfucking Snakes on More Motherfucking Planes.

  5. August 31st, 2006 | 5:15 pm

    The novelization of Snakes On A Plane was written by Christa Faust, a talented writer of erotic horror fiction who’s probably best known for her collaborations with Poppy Z. Brite.

    Apparently audiences are using the movie to have fun with – shouting catch-phrases at the screen and generally having a non-serious good time.

    It’s also been getting good reviews on average. Rotten Tomatoes shows critical reception as roughly equivalent to that of Ghost Dog: Way of the Samurai (average rating around 70%).

    I think this is about your duffest post ever.

  6.   vk
    September 1st, 2006 | 12:57 pm

    pearce, i’m sure its nothing new to you but unfortunately there is a thing called reality and there aint many people prepared to pour money onto a film project if doesnt have the potential to appeal to large enough audience and get them some $$ back. Film makers cant expect people to just donate money so they can make their dreams come true and make a film that only a small minority will be interested in seeing. If the film maker makes films that are good and that would appeal if only given a chance (sob sob) then he/she will just have to work hard to get recognition – a classic example: Sam Raimi.

  7. September 1st, 2006 | 2:23 pm

    vk – are you saying that only dumb movies can make money? ’cause I reckon there might just be an audience for good movies.

  8.   vk
    September 1st, 2006 | 3:37 pm

    No, not at all and im not sure how you got that from what i said. my point was about why films get different budgets and how it’s about appeal to audience numbers and therefore potential investment earnings, not anything about determining how good a film is (or isnt). My example of Sam Raimi is that even though he didnt have a big budget, he still stuck with it, made evil dead, got his audience, and from there was able to make his films, but he had to work hard at the beginning. having a small budget didnt stop him from making his film. And it shouldnt stop anyone else with ‘quality’ film maker skills from doing the same.

  9.   d3vo
    September 2nd, 2006 | 11:12 am

    A bunch of your bloglings saw it ast night. We cheered and hooted and mocked and had a great time. The FBI agent who was clearly not going to live through the movie was wearing a red shirt even!

    And the credits were very very good, would you believe. We had met at the pub before hand for a few drinks, which I’m sure helped no end.

  10.   Administrator
    September 2nd, 2006 | 1:38 pm

    i think my point is there is no point giving this piece of shit any attention whatsoever, so i will not argue with anything anyone raises. maybe i am missing something. so it goes.

    however, to clarify my p.o.v. somewhat, i think what bugs me about the SoaP phenomena is it feels like a celebration of the dumbing down of culture and ourselves. that people seem to be getting into being smarter than a really dumb thing as if it is some kind of achievement.

  11.   homeperm
    September 2nd, 2006 | 10:24 pm

    oh well, we can’t all be serious, all of the time.
    And is it really dumbed down if it’s not trying to be anything other than a piss-take?

  12.   Pearce
    September 10th, 2006 | 1:53 pm

    I think you’ve missed the point, Admin. Never mind.