24 thoughts on “Movie Podcast Weekly Ep. 243: Wonder Woman (2017) and The Bottom 5 Worst Movie Titles Ever (Part 1 of 3)”

1. Two Horror movie titles that are awful enough to mention here are:
   The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia
   The Last Exorcism Part II

   Ha ha ha ha ha!

   Also, does Mack say, “How to ‘Drain’ Your Dragon”?
   Just checking…
   —Jason

   Reply ↓

   • I was just about to come on here and mention The Last Exorcism 2. That is the most asinine title ever. Love this topic.

     Also, I believe the Ecks vs. Sever movie was based on a video game with the same title so that’s a terrible title in two different formats.

     Some other great bad titles:

     Stop or My Mom Will Shoot
     Over the Top
     Ready to Wear
     8 Heads in a Duffel Bag
     Santa Claus: The Movie (as in what the hell else would it be?)
     Ernest (fill in the blank)
     How to Do Things in Denver When You’re Dead (trying way too hard to be clever)

     Reply ↓

     • Jonathan! You made my day in a couple of ways with your comment:

       First, “8 Heads in a Duffel Bag” actually got me very excited! I was immediately intrigued and looked it up, and that’s a 1997 Joe Pesci MOB film! ha ha ha Brother, three of my favorite things! I know what my next 1997 movie segment will be! Thank you! Never even heard of it, but I have to admit to loving that title. It’s in the same vein as “Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia” or “The Three Buriels of Melquiades Estrada.”

       And second, “Things to Do in Denver When You’re Dead” is arguably a dumb title (much like Lindsay Lohan’s “I Know Who Killed Me”), but since the movie is decent — the Denver one, I mean — it redeems the title a little. “I Know Who Killed Me” is equally as awful as its title.

       Thanks for writing!
       J

       Reply ↓

       • Movie titles are like band names — most of them suck, unless your band is good, then they’re really cool! Like, what the hell does it mean to “Toad the Wet Sprocket?” Is that a noun?

         When it comes to 8 Heads in a Duffel Bag, that’s a movie I caught on cable as a kid, and ever since I’ve loved the title and had a fondness for the movie. It’s been about a decade and a half since I watched it though, so if you’re covering it soon, Jay, I’ll be sure to rewatch it.

         Reply ↓

     • Choice list of terrible, terrible names. (high five)

       Reply ↓

2. LOVE DAZED & CONFUSED!!! It was a perfect movie. One of my all-time favorites.

   Reply ↓

   • I think Matt and I just became BFFs.

     Reply ↓

3. Really liked WW but agree with the issues with the final boss fight. On the comments about how the people were obsessing about WW’s looks is to realize the time it takes place. How she is dressed & acts would be unheard of at that time.

   Reply ↓

4. Wonder Woman

   I can’t help but feel like I am watching entirely different movies from the podcast the past few months. So let me get right to the point- Wonder Woman was, by far, the best of the DC movies from the new EU since its launch with The Man of Steel. It’s tone took a much lighter contrast to that of the previous three films. There was humor. There was excitement. There was clearly a theme and a story with fewer twists and turns along the way. In fact, only one serious turn throughout the film and one which led to a conclusion that the story richly deserved. And here is also where my problem with your review lies…

   I don’t think a lot of people are actually understanding the theme.

   This is NOT the Wonder Woman film it’s being marketed as, she is not the hero we deserve, and she is certainly not the iconic goddess that we come to expect. This is not a story about ultimate good finding triumph over evil. The “Villains” are not the dastardly schemers we are being shown, the performances are not what we come to expect, and there is a subtle nuance that I feel has been missed in the pomp and circumstance of the audience hype. This is a far better and far more important and will become far more appreciated with repeat viewings when audiences begin to see details they initially miss.

   Gal Gadot’s performance is pitch perfect… she is confident, aware, and powerful. But she is also innocent to the world around her- she is simplifying her problems at every step, boldly lashing out from one instance to the next. AND THIS IS HER FLAW! Pride, conceit, and arrogance… this is not a story about good conquering evil, this is a story about the loss of innocence and that we have to love one another despite those differences and disappointments. That we have to see the best in people, in one another, and not just lash out in anger and hatred. And in order to do that, Gadot needs to see the best and the worst of people all at once.

   And Chris Pine is everything that humanity is. Noble, heroic, arrogant, deceitful, murderous, protective, and bound by a duty to save people from the worst of themselves. Pine is charming as hell and this is the absolute best performance I’ve ever seen from him- a complex character that would act as guide and connection to the mortal world for Diana. But, just as importantly, the team that surrounds them need to be the kind of characters that they are: A bragging hot shot sniper haunted by the faces of those he’s killed from far away, an actor turned to con-games and thievery because the world couldn’t support his art, and a native-american taking advantage of the struggle between warring Europeans, a man from a conquered people who still extends his friendship to the people who conquered his. Wonder Woman is surrounded by the victims, the perpetrators, and the bottom-feeding parasites of war and is forced to see beneath the filth to the hearts of these men.

   And all this time she is on a mission to confront Ares, God of War… with the idea that by simply defeating this great big “bad” will end all the conflict and bring the world peace. It’s a good thought, one that Pine can’t help but buy in to just a little bit… but one he ultimately realizes is doomed to failure. He’s not there to end the war- he’s there to stop one terrible thing from happening. He wants to stop just one in a long string of horrors on the tail end of a brutal conflict.

   It’s the realization of this truth that Diana truly has to face and overcome.

   Finally, David Thewlis… He absolutely HAD to be the character he was. It was a brilliant nod to Neville.Chamberlain and everything that eventually leads to the Next Great Wat. Having this film take place in WW1 was no accident or asthetic choice. It was important to the theme itself. She absolutely HAD to have that scene before the Generals in order to set up everything that happens. She had to see them for who they were and they absolutely could not see her as anything important.

   8 out of 10 and a definite MUST SEE, OWN, and STUDIED.

   Jay, you almost went e whole show without being sexist or offensive until you described the Amazon’s as masculine. Your male guest, however, tipped that scale right over. Why would a strong woman want to deny her athleticism OR her sexuality? Why can’t a woman be fierce AND beautiful? Weird.

   Reply ↓

   • Well said. I’m in the 8.5-9 range. The ‘No Mans Land’ scene is an instant classic bit of cinema and will be discussed by many for years to come.

     Reply ↓

   • Redcapjack,
     We’ll have to discuss your more in-depth thoughts about “Wonder Woman” when Ryan finally weighs in on the film during Ep. 245… But first, I just wanted to clarify or discuss this portion of your comment:

     You wrote:
     “Jay, you almost went e whole show without being sexist or offensive until you described the Amazon’s as masculine. Your male guest, however, tipped that scale right over. Why would a strong woman want to deny her athleticism OR her sexuality? Why can’t a woman be fierce AND beautiful? Weird.”

     I believe your paragraph conflates some of what I said with some of the points Mack was making. But to be clear, I have no problem with a woman being both fierce and beautiful. (In fact, I married one such gal, ha ha.) And I don’t think a strong woman should deny her athleticism or her sexuality. (Maybe you were addressing Mack’s thoughts there.)

     But yes, I did express my disappointment that the filmmakers chose to depict many of the Amazonian women with more traditionally masculine traits (such a deeper voices), rather than portraying femininity. Indeed, I would submit that celebrating femininity in its own right — without relying on any sort of masculinity — would be a victory for the cinema. In other words, why did they need to be portrayed as masculine? Why wasn’t femininity sufficient or “good enough”?

     To be clear, yes, the spectrum of “femininity” is no doubt broader today than it was, say, in the 1950s, but I’m simply accusing the filmmakers of cheating or “chickening out” on their premise of featuring womanhood, front and center, rather than defaulting to depictions of “maleness.” I just thought it was bizarre that they did that.

     But perhaps I misread it altogether, and the filmmakers were actually trying to present a more modern, more inclusive, broader spectrum of femininity by showing us different types of women with the Amazonians. What do you think?

     Thanks for the great comment, Redcapjack!
     J

     Reply ↓

     • I think you have a point and I was mostly joking, but I didn’t really hear a “deeper” voice so much as a more confident voice. There were depiction if various women amongst the Amazon’s, but the focus was on Diana’s journey to be a warrior despite her mother’s wishes.

       The film makers were definitely showing us a more modern style of females, but more importantly a warrior importantly, a warrior culture of women. Robin Wright’s character is one of the best I’ve seen on film, and I immediately fell in love with Princess Buttercup all over again.

       Reply ↓

   • Redcapjack, I am glad I got on the message boards and read your comments. I thought the MPW crew was much too hard on “Wonder Woman.” As far as superhero movies go, WW was upper-tier stuff in my opinion.

     I was particularly bummed that they were so down on Chris Pine’s performance. I thought he did a fantastic job. I thought the chemistry between him and Gal was GREAT. The end fight was ‘meh’, but the closing emotional moments between Pine and Gadot were excellent. Pine’s final scene got me right in the feels.

     I also really enjoyed Saïd Taghmaoui and thought his character was interesting and well-developed. The other members of the ‘good guy team’ were just okay, but they were all much more memorable than Captain America’s Howling Commandos in “Captain America: The First Avenger.” All I can remember from that group is that one of them wore a bowler hat.

     I am surprised not more was said about the action scenes. They were pretty visually stunning. The slow motion was overused a bit for my taste and there was a few moments of spotty CGI, but overall I had a blast with the action for the first 2/3 of the film. It was better than most of the superhero action scenes I have seen lately.

     I am not really against the ratings given by MPW, it just felt like a pretty grumpy, gripey review. For all their distaste for DC gloominess and brooding, they sure went full DC on their review. It is like they traded the clowncar for a hearse. 🙂

     For me WW is a 7.5 out of 10. After a second viewing, I would not be surprised if it was bumped to an 8 out of 10. Good fun.

     Reply ↓

     • Good observations. Can’t disagree with too much here. =)

       Reply ↓

     • Yeah, I definitely think we didn’t give enough praise to the action scenes in this film, especially that battle between the Amazons and the Germans on the beach. At that point, I knew we were in for a different film altogether and was very excited. My 10 year-old son turned to me after that scene as well and whispered, “Those girls are so epic!”

       Reply ↓

   • Redcapjack,

     I love your assessment of the film here and I agree with you–this is by far DC’s best film and it is not a hero story as we assume…it’s a loss of innocence story. While I initially gave the movie a lower review due to screenwriting (I’m a writer, so I’m tough on movies in this regard) and a lagged last third of the film, your comments have given me a lot to think about. I understand that Steve Trevor’s three WWI colleagues represent victims, perpetrators and bottom-feeders, but there was not enough screen time given to them to fully develop what I had hoped would be deeper characters.

     Now I want to re-watch it with Pine’s performance more in mind, because yes, this is one of my favorite roles for him (I also love him in This Means War, of all films…check out this romcom, if you haven’t) though I must disagree with some other reviewers here that I didn’t sense any consistent chemistry between Pine and Gadot throughout the film…that being said, there is a genuine platonic/eros love that is clear by the end and I was shedding some (okay, a LOT of) tears when Pine takes off in the plane.

     Thank you for bringing these awesome insights.

     Reply ↓

5. I went through my DVD/Blu-Ray collection just to see if any titles stood out as being horrible. A few that stood out to me:

   – In the Kingdom of the Blind, the Man with One Eye Is King

   – Jesse James Meets Frankenstein’s Daughter

   – Halloween H20 – Michael Myers vs…water?

   – Any horror franchise that claims it’s the final movie when it’s not (EG. Friday the 13th The Final Chapter or Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday)

   – Any sequel that purposely has a far too similar title as the original movie (EG. The Final Destination (Final Destination 4), Fast & Furious (The Fast and the Furious 4), ect)

   – Sequels that change how a title is presented (EG. After Halloween 2-5 came Curse of Michael Myers, H20, and Resurrection instead of Halloween 6-8)

   – Remakes that have practically nothing to do with the original movie other than having the same title (EG. April Fools Day)

   Reply ↓

   • Sal, — yes!
     All of the above, but especially these two:

     – Jesse James Meets Frankenstein’s Daughter
     – Halloween H20 – Michael Myers vs…water?

     Ha ha. Naturally, we all know and understand that the H20 references “H” for “Halloween” and the “20” signifies that it’s 20 years later. Yeah, I think the full title is even “Halloween H20: 20 Years Later,” but point taken, because it’s almost like they thought it would be clever, when in reality, it actually doesn’t make any sense.

     J

     Reply ↓

     • The full title being “Halloween H20: 20 Years Later,” makes even less sense since that means the title is basically:

       Halloween Halloween 20 Years Later: 20 Years Later

       When you expand on what the H20 means. Their attempt at making a cute little title has only created confusion for nearly twenty years now.

       Reply ↓

       • Oddly, the titles I dislike are ones that just bore me. A title needs to hook me
         .. and, u fortunately, while it may sound awful and terrible… Jessie James meets Frankenstein’s Daughter at least piques my interest. H20 was very nineties.

         I blame Scream

         Reply ↓

6. Jason, Many thanks for getting my name night. The Young Offenders is a pretty good comedy. Other things from Cork include:Martin’s Life

   The game of thrones episode:
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s6P-gqWGXs

   Martin’s Life – skyping the sister
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AOS_9qTg40

   The Frank and Walters are also from Cork. (brillant band)
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex5H5YgV7LU

   I think Linda Carter was indeed the best Wonder Woman.

   Reply ↓

7. Solid episode to all. Catherine (and Mack) were wonderful guest hosts, and Catherine cemented her status as elite by name-checking Breaking Bad and The Wire as two of the greatest TV series of all time. Can she come back every week? Once a month? More often than not?
   Y’all always do a great job of scouting grade-A guest hosts, and I’m never disappointed.
   LOVE the bad movie title idea. I was mumbling “Octopussy, Octopussy” as I was listening on the bus, and Karl eventually saved the day! (And ultimately saved me from humiliation, lest I continue to mumble “Octopussy” to myself in public).

   One category I was waiting on and didn’t hear was when movies change their titles after marketing/after theatrical release. One example is “Edge of Tomorrow” changing to “Live, Die, Repeat.” Was it ever called LDR? Or was it always EOT? Due to the strange marketing, I was never sure. HATE it when films do this. Pick a name and stick to it. I would never go from “DJ Godzilla” to “HR Puff ‘n Stuff” on a whim. Everyone would become confused and outraged.

   Looking forward to Round 2 of bad titles!

   Reply ↓

   • Thanks, DJ Godzilla!

     Reply ↓

8. The season 3 finale of Better Call Saul just aired and it was an absolute killer. Took a little while for that show to find its legs, but it has a comparable amount of depth and character as Breaking Bad. It’s lighter in tone, for sure, but definitely not light.

   I’m probably in the minority of people who thought Breaking Bad got worse over time. I binged it all right before its finale a couple years ago, and experiencing it all together like that made some of where it ends up going feel more outlandish and over-the-top to me, whereas the first season or two is just a brilliant portrayal of normal guy getting deeply mixed up in a crazy world. That being said, I still loved the rest of the series. It just seemed less believable from a certain point on. Still very engaging and impressive in terms of the writing and performances, though.

   Also, Catherine, if you’re single, I hereby offer a marriage proposal. Well, maybe a mini-golf date first.
   😄

   Reply ↓