rdfs:comment
| - Can you believe that somebody paid the equivalent of $10 U.S. to see these movies in theaters (or paid about $30 U.S. to watch them at home)? Yeah, we couldn't either. Somebody made these films which, to put it kindly, didn't turn out so well. Second Important Note: It isn't a Horrible film just because anyone from That Guy With The Glasses and/or any other Caustic Critic reviewed it. There needs to be independent evidence, such as actual critics (emphasis on plural) for example, to list it. (Though once it is listed, they can provide the detailed review.)
|
abstract
| - Can you believe that somebody paid the equivalent of $10 U.S. to see these movies in theaters (or paid about $30 U.S. to watch them at home)? Yeah, we couldn't either. Somebody made these films which, to put it kindly, didn't turn out so well. Important Note: Merely being offensive in its subject matter, a Box Office Bomb, or a film you don't plain like is not sufficient. Hard as it is to imagine at times, there is a market for all types of deviancy, no matter how small a niche it is. It has to fail to appeal even to that niche to qualify as this. (If you're unsure whether it belongs here or not, visit the discussion page and give us your input. Otherwise, if it's something you just plain don't like, please don't shoehorn it in, this isn't a page for complaining about things that fail to you.) Second Important Note: It isn't a Horrible film just because anyone from That Guy With The Glasses and/or any other Caustic Critic reviewed it. There needs to be independent evidence, such as actual critics (emphasis on plural) for example, to list it. (Though once it is listed, they can provide the detailed review.) Examples (more-or-less in alphabetical order):
|