MovieChat Forums > What Just Happened (2008) Discussion > This Movie SUCKED

This Movie SUCKED

posted 16 years ago by cloutier_rob
43 replies | jump to latest

MY god what a piece of junk this thing was.

I tried to watch it one night, and in the 1st 15 minutes i couldn't handle it anymore, i had to turn it off...and i kept saying out loud "wow what a piece of chit that was"

So then 2 days later im like...ok i'll give it another shot
thinking maybe i just wasn't in the mood for it, and no dice....it sucked hardcore.

My parents own a movie theatre and in the last 7 years i have seen A LOT of movies...and quite honestly, none have come even close to being this bad.

Maybe it's because of cast expectations, but still this movie was awful
and to see ANYONE post messages about oscar awards and best performances, just confirms my thoughts on how incredibly moronic the everage, every day person is.

[–] cableaddict 16 years ago

Yep.

[–] Holden27 16 years ago

I second that emotion! :>

But look at its rating! So much about imdb's "weights". I suppose they're balanced by De Niro - if he's in it, this must be a good movie, 'cos De Niro dosen't act in bad movies...even if the viewer feels like watching was a waste of time, and the movie was boring, pointless and not at all funny (not even in the stupid way).

[–] masteru 16 years ago

I watched only 49 minutes.. then I turned it off

[–] nasta 16 years ago

+1

This was really a pathetic movie.

[–] emrextreme-1 16 years ago

[–] Taxpanda66 16 years ago

I made it through 38 minutes... gawd - what a complete waste of time. These actors have enough money. They couldn't have done it for the paycheck, right? Were they just bored and wanted to pull one over on us?? I hope they're laughing, because I'm certainly not.

[–] scvido 16 years ago

i just finished watching the movie and asked my self..

WHAT JUST HAPPENED! in this movie?

if it wasn't for the superb acting of De Niro this movie would've fell into garbage.

i gave it a 5/10 only for DeNiro performance, the movie per se is a borefest.

[–] Nobunagaaaa 16 years ago

I was bored this week and I looked at the cover of this movie several times and couldn't convince myself to watch.. pretty sure i will hate it.

[–] samueljesse-1 16 years ago

I can't believe this has a rating of 7/10... This movie is NOT worth watching... When it ended I was in dismay that I was stupid enough to watch the whole thing, hoping there would be some form of decent plot.

[–] warped-one 16 years ago

100% agree, this movie was so bad. The music when De Niro is first driving on the highway and pulls over about to look at the critics report is SO bad. I only watched upto here then stopped... 2days later, i watched the whole thing thinking it might get better as it went on but i was wrong. De Niro is definitely a fading star, the movies his doing at the moment are getting worse and worse.

Don't know how this movie could of scored 7/10 - all i can think of is that the studio has paid people to cast fake votes or something :S

[–] blackout66 16 years ago

Wasn't that Ennio Morricone? I agree that the movie is bloody pointless but man, you can't say that Ennio sucks.

[–] TigerEyes234 16 years ago

I concur. I knew in the first 20 minutes the film would be not enjoyable and not interesting.

[–] bozkovitch 16 years ago

This movie looks like and episode from a series or something. If they wanted to show how a producer`s life is in fact boring then they succeeded.

[–] smith267 16 years ago

I agree. This movie was so incredibly boring. Nothing happened at all. There is a reason why Hollywood producers are unknown by 99% of the general public... they have boring jobs.

[–] joemomma337 16 years ago

And Bruce Willis misquotes Hunter S. Thompson--he was talking about the music business. Blasphemy.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Richardball291 16 years ago

If a film cannot draw you in within the first five minutes, let alone the first fifteen, then it has failed to do it's job and therefore will mostly continue to under perform for the remainder. No one movie functions on the premise that:

"It has a good ending"

Or.

"The fight scene was pretty good"

A film should be consistent in quality throughout, but a film failing to even grab audiences from the very first minute is tantamount to losing them all together.

-Challenging Conventional Wisdom is possibly the greatest Sin for a Scientist...BUT OH SO RIGHT!

[–] Tony_Hedlund 16 years ago

I don't think this movie was ever supposed to be either good or bad, just a comedy into real-life Hollywood-stars and the ppl. around them.

I find it rude to just dismiss a movie because it's not up you your expectations, or in this matter, more precise genre.

I saw the movie for what it was - The everyday life of a producer in a cut-throat world.
End of story!

Don't you go clanking down on it because it's no Die Hard 5, with X 5 vengeance.
It's more of an documentary than a movie really.

I'm so sick of ppl. even thinking about thinking about what they just saw, and things around that, and just "Worst movie ever" bla. bla. bla...

GTFU!

"-For crying out loud..." *Jack O'Neill - Stargate SG1*

[–] bpopes 16 years ago

de niro alone is worth seeing this jus to see him acting great in a recent movie . but if ur expecting something more than a day or days in the life of a producer which is what the movie explains it is, then dont watch it. period. don't get on here to talk *beep* about it just because u wanted to start a post bc ur parents own a movie theater an u think u kno *beep* about movies. if u think this is the worst thing that you ever seen then you should get an award cuz there's A LOT worse than this. idk, i jus dont get how u can say this is the worst. u must just b the definition of a hater. rather than start a post on something u claim to hate, go make something better urself.

[–] Tony_Hedlund 16 years ago

You did what 99% of imdb-users did - Pushed the wrong reply-button... Change viewing-mode to Nest to see which reply goes where...

"-For crying out loud..." *Jack O'Neill - Stargate SG1*

[–] ThisIsMyBoomstick12345 16 years ago

First thread I think ever on IMDb with this many people agreeing with a "THIS MOVIE SUCKED" topic.

But, agreed. Hated it.

I would say 'that's that', Mattress Man. ~Punch Drunk Love

[–] Tony_Hedlund 16 years ago

You did what 99% of imdb-users did - Pushed the wrong reply-button... Change viewing-mode to Nest to see which reply goes where... []

"-For crying out loud..." *Jack O'Neill - Stargate SG1*

[–] nex-16 16 years ago

25 minutes into it and so far like it. Vignettes mainly, but some priceless ones, like the south London nutter going down in flames over the cutting of the dog shot. I say this movie's not bad, at least the first 25 minutes' worth. It's all about dialog and laughing/sneering at stereotypes, a bit like the Allen movies. It's humor-based, in case that slipped by 98% of you.

During the Soprano years some talked only of the violence, and rarely the superb humor. Because the humor didn't slap them in the face, it obviously didn't exist.

Sure, there's no accounting for taste but 98%? You're collectively disabled. Nex

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]