Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Snakes on a Plane: The Dialogues

UNIVERSAL REMOTE

I recently had an email debate with a friend that I will refer to as "Mike." Mike and I spent a good part of the day yesterday shirking work debating the pros and cons of Snakes on a Plane both as a title and a potential cult classic. Here are the complete transcripts, edited only for clarity and to make me seem smarter. (Just kidding.)

MIKE (11:45 am):
FOOD FOR THOUGHT (and I’m NOT saying Snakes on a Plane is going to definitely be bad):

The following is an off the top of my head list of movies that were about EXACTLY WHAT THE TITLE WAS and still sucked.

Starship Troopers
A Bug's Life
Turbulance
Pinero
Fried Green Tomatoes
John Carpenter's Vampires
John Carpenter's Ghosts of Mars (debatable)
13 John Carpenter's Assault on Precinct 13
John Carpenter's Escape from L.A.
Ray
Dirty Dancing
Lambada: The Forbidden Dance
Angels in the Outfield
A Kid in King Arthur's Court
The Passion of the Christ
The Adventures of Pluto Nash
Batman & Robin
Supergirl
Catwoman
Napoleon Dynamite
Air Bud: Golden Receiver (or any of the Air Bud saga)

All of these movies have TWO things in common.... They all suck, and they all have ZERO irony in their titles. So let’s just say... The jury’s still out on Snakes on a Plane.

I’m sure there are more... But that’s all for now
SERGIO (3:06 pm):
I don't think I agree. Snakes on a Plane is a far better description than Starship Troopers. I define it this way: Can the movie's title also be used as the movie description in the TV Listings? Like this:

CH. 2 / 8:00 / SNAKES ON A PLANE (2006) Snakes on a plane.

I don't think this applies to the other titles in your list. Sure Starship Troopers is about starship troopers, but it doesn't give any indication of the arena or plot direction. I think the title most similar is Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle which is a terrific title, but not as funny (to me at least) as Snakes on a Plane.

And by the way, Starship Troopers didn't suck. It is awesome. I actually just watched the first hour again a couple weeks ago. It is one of the funniest satires in a long time. I call it "A good movie disguised as a bad movie."
MIKE (3:39pm):
I knew a girl who tried to sell me that “satire” line about Starship Troopers. She even tried to tell me that I “didn’t get it.”

It’s funny that you pick this particular flick out of ALL the ones I listed, because back when that was coming out I was one of the few admitted geeks in my circle who DIDN’T think it was going to be all that great. I was even told at one point “You’re On Crack if you don’t think that’s gonna be the best movie of the year (swear to god).” Mind you... This was two months before it even came out. THAT guy wound up admitting to have spoken too soon, and now, like many others, refers to the film as Starship Poopers. But who knows, maybe I’ll give it another shot. But until then I still maintain that the “Bad Movie Disguise” it wears is a pretty good one.

I’m just saying that just because a movie’s title describes a certain degree of plot does not AUTOMATICALLY make it good. This is not to say the movie is DEFINITELY going to be bad either (I want to make that ABUNDANTLY clear).

Let’s put it this way... If the aforementioned Air Bud was called Dog That Plays Basketball would that have made it better??

If The Terminal was called Tom Hanks Plays Foreign Guy Trapped at an Airport would that have made it good??

If Ishtar was called Two Singers in the Desert would it have made more money?

If Waterworld was called World of Water would that have made it awesome?

If Pinero was called Blatant Oscar Bait with No Real Narrative would it have been ANY good? Well... Maybe.

All Snakes on a Plane really is, is a working title that escaped onto the internet and captured the hearts of the geeks.

If SOAP winds up changing it’s title to Flight 121, which is likely, It’ll still be the same mediocre horror movie that 9 times out of 10 would have wound up premiering at Blockbuster if it weren’t for the rabid internet following. The REAL difference is that if it WAS called Flight 121 the same people who are now pledging allegiance to it’s “brilliance” would be dismissing it as yet another lame Sam Jackson movie that will have a four day theater run at the most.

So I, personally, am going to wait until the movie actually comes out to get behind it. And I hope it is cool, because those t-shirts ARE pretty sweet.
SERGIO (3:58 pm):
First off, I'm not saying a movie is automatically good because it's title is a description of the plot. Air Bud would still suck no matter what it was called. And secondly, it is not just the the title is Snakes on a Plane that makes it funny, it's that the concept of people fighting snakes on a plane is very funny. Of course, no one would be interested in this movie if it were called Flight 121, least of all me. As you said, it would "still be the same mediocre horror movie" that no one cares about. But because they are calling it Snakes on a Plane, they are giving the audience a wink and saying "Yes, this is a crappy C-level programmer, but we know that sometimes these kinds of movies become beloved because they are so trashy." If New Line changes the title back to Flight 121, they eliminate this goodwill are go back to selling us something that we'll feel guilty spending our money on in theaters. By calling it Snakes on a Plane, it becomes a point of pride to see it in with a paying audience. Flight 121 is just another crappy Samuel L. Jackson sell-out movie. Snakes on a Plane is another classic Samuel L. Jackson so-bad-it's-good movie.
MIKE (4:29 pm):
I’m curious about these “Samuel Jackson So Bad it’s Good” films you speak of. But that’s not important.

In short: just because there is an admission of CRAP, a filmmaker should not necessarily be rewarded for creating said CRAP. If it looks like crap, and it smells like crap, and stars Samuel Jackson... Chances are... It’s CRAP.

Now look here... I plan on seeing SoaP out of sheer curiosity but my expectations are as LOW as they would have been had I bought a ticket for The Man. I like movies like that. I liked Anaconda. I liked Lake Placid. I just question the hoopla surrounding this particular barrell of cheese.

I think much of it, is more out of a need that many geeks have to be in on the ground floor. You know what I mean... To be the ones that stood by something. So when the masses all come in and start liking something, We can be the one’s to whip open our shirt with the Bootleg SoaP logo on it, and say “IN YOUR FACE, TURD, I LOVED THIS MOVIE WAY LONGER THAN YOUR POSER ASS!!!”

This is the VERY reason that websites like AICN, COMICS 2 FILM, etc. (sites I visit daily by the way) exist in the first place. Because there are geeks out there that want to say “YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST.”

And in many cases, out of a need NOT TO BE PROVEN WRONG, geeks (like me) sometimes can’t admit when these movies strike out. But that’s what makes it more intriguing, no?? To be the one guy on the planet who LOVES and defends a movie when everybody else thinks they’re total crap.

Why else would I have both Death to Smoochy and Joe Versus the Volcano on my DVD shelf. Two movies that are almost UNIVERSALLY hated, and I LOVE THEM!!! If I were a betting man, I’d say you probably like those titles too.

Bottom line: I asked the same friend that MOCKED me for not being into Starship Troopers, what he thought about SoaP. He said simply: “I say Bring it on Sam Jackson.”

YES! Sam Jackson... Bring it on indeed.
SERGIO (4:49 pm):
Deep Blue Sea is a classic good/bad Sam Jackson movie.

Now I'm exhausted and want to take a nap.
MIKE (4:55 pm):
Deep Blue Sea. Indeed. From Finnish “Super-Director” Renny Harlin. Good call. But I’ll leave you with this... Most of SLJ’s starring efforts are so bad they’re bad.
That Snakes on a Plane can provoke this much enthusiasm nine months before it comes out is proof that they've caught lightening in a bottle. Now lets just pray they don't change the title to Flight 121.

PREVIOUS SNAKES ON A PLANE POSTS:
08/24/05 - Ssssssssssssss.....
10/04/05 - Snakes on a Plane UPDATE
11/08/05 - Snakes on a Plane UPDATE 2
11/24/05 - Snakes on a Plane UPDATE 3

1 Comments:

Blogger Chill said...

Snakes on a Plane will be a bad, bad movie. I'm thinking something on the level of "How High", which I still watch whenever it is on. But I agree, that the wink is what makes it interesting. I don't think it will make it a better movie, though.

"Joe vs. the volcano" is, however, a legitimately funny/good movie.

Wednesday, November 30, 2005 1:11:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home