Showgirls Exposed - Unofficial Sequel (I think...)
06-08-10, 10:48 PM
#1
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Thread Starter
Showgirls Exposed - Unofficial Sequel (I think...)
Plot Synopsis;
The film is about a stripper who dies from a dose of contaminated batch of cocaine, and her brother who goes on a mission to find the responsible and enact revenge.
/Film posted the below trailer, as well as message board comments between the film's German director, Marc Vorlander, and twitch.com's editor, Todd Brown, in response to Brown's article titled My Eyes Can Stand No More Than Four Minutes Of Marc Vorlander's SHOWGIRLS: EXPOSED. Some of the back and forth, again provided by /film;
NSFW Trailer;
I have no idea what to say about this movie. I mean, I think it's a movie. But some of Worlander's claims seem too outlandish to take seriously, such as raising $25 million(!) for the movie. This looks so awful that I can't help to think that the ineptitude is deliberate.
Which leads me to a question - Are we entering into an age where making a bad movie is its own reward? Consider The Room, or Birdemic; two films that are largely known for how bad they are are. The original Showgirls shares that same recognition, but there was actual effort put into that one. Would a director consider purposefully making a bad movie, knowing full well that people will be drawn to its mediocrity?
The film is about a stripper who dies from a dose of contaminated batch of cocaine, and her brother who goes on a mission to find the responsible and enact revenge.
/Film posted the below trailer, as well as message board comments between the film's German director, Marc Vorlander, and twitch.com's editor, Todd Brown, in response to Brown's article titled My Eyes Can Stand No More Than Four Minutes Of Marc Vorlander's SHOWGIRLS: EXPOSED. Some of the back and forth, again provided by /film;
VORLANDER: The difference between controversial art and crap is very easy: controversial art is hated, panned, discussed…, crap simply dissapears into nowhere immediately, exactly like Rena Riffels project, that is also based on Showgirls and can be used in this case perfectly to demonstrate the difference…Thanks for passionately hating my work so less objective. I can not take this serious, but I appreciate it since it fits perfectly in the calculated behavior of self-styled movie critics that would not even detect art if you would engrave the word in their glasses to help them with it.
BROWN: If you’re making art here, you’re doing it the same way Ed Wood did: Incompetently and by accident. And if the film has a lasting shelf life I suspect it’ll be for the same reason. Because people enjoy laughing at it. Being a joke - even a very, very funny one - is not the same thing as being an artist. Right now, everything you’ve released from this film is a joke, not art…I’ll be happy to take a look at the completed film once it’s finished and if it turns out that you’ve made something worthwhile I’ll happily come out and say I was wrong with my earlier comments.
Spoiler:
I have no idea what to say about this movie. I mean, I think it's a movie. But some of Worlander's claims seem too outlandish to take seriously, such as raising $25 million(!) for the movie. This looks so awful that I can't help to think that the ineptitude is deliberate.
Which leads me to a question - Are we entering into an age where making a bad movie is its own reward? Consider The Room, or Birdemic; two films that are largely known for how bad they are are. The original Showgirls shares that same recognition, but there was actual effort put into that one. Would a director consider purposefully making a bad movie, knowing full well that people will be drawn to its mediocrity?
06-09-10, 02:21 AM
#5
Banned by request
Re: Showgirls Exposed - Unofficial Sequel (I think...)
Which leads me to a question - Are we entering into an age where making a bad movie is its own reward? Consider The Room, or Birdemic; two films that are largely known for how bad they are are. The original Showgirls shares that same recognition, but there was actual effort put into that one. Would a director consider purposefully making a bad movie, knowing full well that people will be drawn to its mediocrity?
06-09-10, 06:32 PM
#8
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: Showgirls Exposed - Unofficial Sequel (I think...)
If I could paraphrase from Billy Madison: Everyone in this room is now dumber for having viewed that. I award it no points.
06-09-10, 10:32 PM
#9
Banned
Re: Showgirls Exposed - Unofficial Sequel (I think...)
Which leads me to a question - Are we entering into an age where making a bad movie is its own reward? Consider The Room, or Birdemic; two films that are largely known for how bad they are are. The original Showgirls shares that same recognition, but there was actual effort put into that one. Would a director consider purposefully making a bad movie, knowing full well that people will be drawn to its mediocrity?
06-09-10, 11:08 PM
#11
Banned by request
Re: Showgirls Exposed - Unofficial Sequel (I think...)
dx, I agree that there are people who try to make bad movies, but generally the ones who try to make bad movies make mediocre movies. Truly awful movies aren't made on purpose.
06-10-10, 05:07 PM
#13
Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Winter Park, FL
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Showgirls Exposed - Unofficial Sequel (I think...)
Yeah, the song was brilliant compared to the accompanying imagery (which wasn't bad per-se, just, well, WEIRD).
I'm compelled to ask the obvious question here - just how, why, where, when is this related to Verhoeven's Showgirls? Is there a common narrative? Are there at least references to ANY of the characters in the "first" film? Or is this another example of just cashing in on the notoriety of a previous film via the movie title, but really having nothing to do with it?
That trailer...I dunno, it's distressingly mesmerizing.
I'm compelled to ask the obvious question here - just how, why, where, when is this related to Verhoeven's Showgirls? Is there a common narrative? Are there at least references to ANY of the characters in the "first" film? Or is this another example of just cashing in on the notoriety of a previous film via the movie title, but really having nothing to do with it?
That trailer...I dunno, it's distressingly mesmerizing.
06-11-10, 10:11 PM
#15
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Showgirls Exposed - Unofficial Sequel (I think...)
So am I the only one who thought this was a joke not even a minute into the "teaser"? Is this a very late April Fools joke?
