A complaint about bad cinema
Mar. 14th, 2006 08:45 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
msluluOkay, it's no great secret that I love cheesy movies. However, there are a few things that really piss me off.
Like irresponsible sequels.
First of all, if you're going to make a sequel, at least make one from a movie that deserves one.
If you're not going to do that, at least you could pay attention to some of the details and not make major continuity errors.
My bitch today is brought to you courtesy of the straight-to-video soon to be classic, The Cutting Edge 2: Going for the Gold.
What's wrong with this movie? Well, other than the obvious answer of "what isn't?" let's talk about our main character, Jackie Dorsey. Jackie is an Olympic hopeful. She plans to skate in the 2006 Winter Olympics. She gets romantically entangled with her pairs partner, and it's all really quite predictable. My problem here is that this movie is not trying to be just a retelling of the original Cutting Edge with a different set of skaters (Much like the sequel to the Cheerleading classic Bring it On, which from what I could tell was about cheerleading, but not at all related to the original story. I could be wrong, I didn't see it.) No. In this case, Jackie Dorsey is the daughter of Kate Moseley and Doug Dorsey, the bickering pairs skaters who fell in love in the original.
So, here's my problem. The original film starts in 1988 with both Kate and Doug wiping out separately during the Olympics. Four years later, they skate together for the first time in the 1992 Albertville games. Does anyone see the problem here? Did I mention that Jackie and her partner are not young adolescents and rather are quite the adults? See, even assuming that Kate was already pregnant at the time she and Doug skated in Albertville, which she wasn't, that would make the daughter of that union not even 14 years old come 2006.
Such a simple detail. And yet, someone was in such a rush to make this crappy movie, that they couldn't wait the four necessary years to make it plausible.
And these are the things that keep me up at night.
Like irresponsible sequels.
First of all, if you're going to make a sequel, at least make one from a movie that deserves one.
If you're not going to do that, at least you could pay attention to some of the details and not make major continuity errors.
My bitch today is brought to you courtesy of the straight-to-video soon to be classic, The Cutting Edge 2: Going for the Gold.
What's wrong with this movie? Well, other than the obvious answer of "what isn't?" let's talk about our main character, Jackie Dorsey. Jackie is an Olympic hopeful. She plans to skate in the 2006 Winter Olympics. She gets romantically entangled with her pairs partner, and it's all really quite predictable. My problem here is that this movie is not trying to be just a retelling of the original Cutting Edge with a different set of skaters (Much like the sequel to the Cheerleading classic Bring it On, which from what I could tell was about cheerleading, but not at all related to the original story. I could be wrong, I didn't see it.) No. In this case, Jackie Dorsey is the daughter of Kate Moseley and Doug Dorsey, the bickering pairs skaters who fell in love in the original.
So, here's my problem. The original film starts in 1988 with both Kate and Doug wiping out separately during the Olympics. Four years later, they skate together for the first time in the 1992 Albertville games. Does anyone see the problem here? Did I mention that Jackie and her partner are not young adolescents and rather are quite the adults? See, even assuming that Kate was already pregnant at the time she and Doug skated in Albertville, which she wasn't, that would make the daughter of that union not even 14 years old come 2006.
Such a simple detail. And yet, someone was in such a rush to make this crappy movie, that they couldn't wait the four necessary years to make it plausible.
And these are the things that keep me up at night.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 04:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 06:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 04:55 am (UTC)Mmmmmm... yummy
G
no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 07:14 am (UTC)I know this isn't a post about bad sequels in general, but all I haveta say is..."Caddyshack 2". Game. Set. Match.
no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 04:43 pm (UTC)What the fuck?
no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 06:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-16 06:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-16 03:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-19 08:44 pm (UTC)Worst sequel ever? It hasn't been made yet, but it will be, without a doubt, The Core II.