Zombie Nightmare blu ray coming from Code Red -

[Member-222782]

One self is one's own best critic

Personally, I have no use for paid critics (or reviewers, for that matter). The only way to judge anything (a book, a Broadway show, a film, etc) is to check it out yourself.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by cine74

One self is one's own best critic

Personally, I have no use for paid critics (or reviewers, for that matter). The only way to judge anything (a book, a Broadway show, a film, etc) is to check it out yourself.

You don't seem to be aware what IMDB is then.

[Member-222782]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

You don't seem to be aware what IMDB is then.

OK, I'll play this game. Besides a comprehensive film database, it's a place where regular people post comments about movies they've watched. Comments range from asinine to thoughtful. My point was, someone wrote that Zombie Nightmare rated a 2.2 - whether this means it's highly regarded or bottom of the barrel is irrelevant. What matters is what you - meaning, you - think of a film. Bottom line, don't let other people's opinions dictate whether or not you like a film, especially if you haven't seen it.

[butler]

It's a fun movie. You can pretty much throw out the window any IMDB rating of a movie shown on MST3K. Fanboys just go on there and give them all low ratings. The IMDB bottom 100 is full of MST3k films.

[DenOfEarth]

Personally i thought this movie sucked ass, i rented this when i was 7 when it hit video stores and thought it blew. Slack pacing, poor acting, lame kills, weak ending etc.

I'm glad MST3k riffed this turkey apart.

You can't polish a turd you know.

[oishearsy]

You can pretty much throw out the window any IMDB rating of a movie shown on MST3K.

[lolwut]

Originally Posted by cine74

OK, I'll play this game. Besides a comprehensive film database, it's a place where regular people post comments about movies they've watched. Comments range from asinine to thoughtful. My point was, someone wrote that Zombie Nightmare rated a 2.2 - whether this means it's highly regarded or bottom of the barrel is irrelevant. What matters is what you - meaning, you - think of a film. Bottom line, don't let other people's opinions dictate whether or not you like a film, especially if you haven't seen it.

It means it's bottom of the barrel. If you have time to watch every movie then the rating means nothing, but if you're at all selective about what you watch, a 2.2 is extremely low.

Originally Posted by butler

It's a fun movie. You can pretty much throw out the window any IMDB rating of a movie shown on MST3K. Fanboys just go on there and give them all low ratings. The IMDB bottom 100 is full of MST3k films.

Really? Only fanboys are able to tell that the films shown on MST3K are terrible?

[Sinep]

Wake me up when youre done debating (unnecessarily) over an IMDB rating. Go outside and do something useful ..good grief people argue over the stupidest things

[lolwut]

"Wake me up when youre done debating (unnecessarily) over an IMDB rating. Go outside and do something useful ..good grief people argue over the stupidest things ", Sinep said while outside doing something useful.

[NoirFan]

Originally Posted by lolwut

Really? Only fanboys are able to tell that the films shown on MST3K are terrible?

They're not all terrible. Tormented, I Bury the Living and Squirm are all far better than their MST-skewed IMDB ratings would suggest. MST3k fanboys simply and robotically assign ratings of zero to any and all movies mocked on the show, regardless of the actual content of the film. One could easily make the argument that someone watching a heavily edited version of a film with three voices talking incessantly over the dialog cannot possibly judge the truncated, compromised final product fairly and fully. That said, I'd venture that 99% of films skewered on MST3k are of extremely poor quality, but one shouldn't just unthinkingly dismiss a movie solely by virtue of its inclusion on the program.

[Wernski]

Originally Posted by NoirFan

One could easily make the argument that someone watching a heavily edited version of a film with three voices talking incessantly over the dialog cannot possibly judge the truncated, compromised final product fairly and fully.

Oh yes, another good point. I hadn't thought of that but yes, absolutely.

That said, I'd venture that 99% of films skewered on MST3k are of extremely poor quality, but one shouldn't just unthinkingly dismiss a movie solely by virtue of its inclusion on the program.

Yep, agreed.

[digideadus]

Originally Posted by -zombie-

I've never seen this film but I'd definitely buy it on BD.

I've never watched it either and would love to add it to my Bluray collection as well. Sounds like a fun flick!

[Wernski]

Originally Posted by lolwut

Really? Only fanboys are able to tell that the films shown on MST3K are terrible?

I get what he means... It's more like MST3K drives lots of people to those films' IMDB pages - to read about and then down vote them - that wouldn't ordinarily go to low budget films of their type otherwise. Like, if you had three films exactly equal to Zombie Nightmare, but only the one had been an MST3K episode, that one would have a lot more down votes than the others. And not just because MST3K would get it more traffic, but because it would get it traffic specifically from people who wouldn't ordinarily seek these films out, or even know how Zombie Nightmare would stack alongside the other films of its caliber. Whereas the other films' pages would have a much higher percentage of ratings from fans of low budget/ obscure/ cult films of their nature, and thus their scores would be more "fair" in a way.

But yeah, in this case Zombie Nightmare really is a pretty sucky picture, and quite deserving of it's "an MST3K movie" stigma if you ask me.