I don't even know how to properly express my anguish. I suppose it would be fair to admit that I am, usually, an avid lover of terrible movies. "The Room" was a work of brilliance, and it really doesn't get much better than "Birdemic: Shock and Terror".
"Howard the Duck" was crossing the line.
This transcended the threshold of "so bad it's good". It wasn't bad in a "Ghost Rider" way. It wasn't even bad in a "Dogma" sort of way. This movie has put to question what terrible cinema truly is, at its core. I'm honestly disgusted with myself after having seen this movie.
Crusaders in its defense have united in a joyful cry of Howard's "originality" and "playfulness". Pray tell, what exactly about it is unique? Aside the fact that our main protagonist is a space- duck... what else? The story itself is deeply wanting in creativity, as are the painfully wooden characters, and campy, repulsive dialogue.
The special effects, while acceptable, were not mind blowing. Especially Howard himself. The "good guy" should never give you nightmares. Howard was trollish and creepy. Not to mention, seriously flawed in his character. What a jerk.
I'd also like to address the idea that this movie was some sort of B-movie phenomenon. This movie, believe it or not, was made in a very serious way. I think the mere fact that George Lucas was somehow attached to this project ought to demonstrate that. That in consideration, there really is no excuse for how vile this movie was. This wasn't a movie that was parading its own flaws, that wasn't "egotistical" or "vain", and it certainly wasn't aiming to please the cult crowd. The sorry truth of the matter is, Howard the Duck was spawned in the same ambitious way as Star Wars. THIS was supposed to be an epic.
That's just unacceptable. This whole movie is unacceptable. I feel betrayed.
"Howard the Duck" was crossing the line.
This transcended the threshold of "so bad it's good". It wasn't bad in a "Ghost Rider" way. It wasn't even bad in a "Dogma" sort of way. This movie has put to question what terrible cinema truly is, at its core. I'm honestly disgusted with myself after having seen this movie.
Crusaders in its defense have united in a joyful cry of Howard's "originality" and "playfulness". Pray tell, what exactly about it is unique? Aside the fact that our main protagonist is a space- duck... what else? The story itself is deeply wanting in creativity, as are the painfully wooden characters, and campy, repulsive dialogue.
The special effects, while acceptable, were not mind blowing. Especially Howard himself. The "good guy" should never give you nightmares. Howard was trollish and creepy. Not to mention, seriously flawed in his character. What a jerk.
I'd also like to address the idea that this movie was some sort of B-movie phenomenon. This movie, believe it or not, was made in a very serious way. I think the mere fact that George Lucas was somehow attached to this project ought to demonstrate that. That in consideration, there really is no excuse for how vile this movie was. This wasn't a movie that was parading its own flaws, that wasn't "egotistical" or "vain", and it certainly wasn't aiming to please the cult crowd. The sorry truth of the matter is, Howard the Duck was spawned in the same ambitious way as Star Wars. THIS was supposed to be an epic.
That's just unacceptable. This whole movie is unacceptable. I feel betrayed.