Eric’s Bad Movies: ‘Waterworld’ (1995)
We’ve reached a milestone in Eric’s Bad Movies at Film.com, as this week’s column — “Waterworld,” the ambitious flop from 1995 starring Kevin Costner — is the 50th entry in the series. That means a year has gone by since we started (there were two vacation weeks in there somewhere), way back on April 3, 2008. Fifty bad movies a year is the FDA-approved recommended annual allowance.
Sorry for the radio silence the last several days, by the way. SXSW was a blast, as always, followed by a weekend trip to Houston to see a friend, which was also fun. But I returned home to find a huge pile of things that needed to get done — and I also, at some point, decided to run for a position on the Governing Committee of the Online Film Critics Society. The politics involved there have been much more time-consuming (not to mention rancorous) than you would think. Anyway, next week should be back to normal, more or less, whatever that means.
March 26th, 2009 at 10:42 am
I will be honest, i like Waterworld, warts and all. You did bring up some points that I had overlooked.
Maybe more water showed up from Noah’s flood, or water spilled out from the hollow center of the planet. Who knows.
March 26th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Are you done giving hints about the next week’s EBM? I liked the little guessing game each week.
March 26th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
My favorite thing about this movie: all the cans of “Smeat.”
March 26th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Susquatch:
Yes, Eric announced some time ago that he would no longer provide clues for next week’s entry. Some of us are still mourning the loss.
March 26th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
No hints on Eric’s bad movies?
No weekly Snide Remarks?
What has happened to my favorite site since I stopped checking in 5 times a day??
Oh well. Guess good things can’t last forever.
March 26th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
I actually kind of liked Waterworld too. I don’t think it quite lives down to Eric’s usual low standard of quality. Or should that be high standard of low quality? Aw, you know what I mean.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:23 am
Wait a minute. There’s an EXTENDED edition of Waterworld? Wasn’t it already 2+ hours long? What more could they possibly include?
For the record, I agree that Waterworld isn’t really that bad. It should be the first column in “Eric’s Mediocre Movies.”
March 27th, 2009 at 7:50 am
Oh, okay. Thanks Chris, I must’ve missed that.
On a side note, on the subject of bad Costner movies, you’ve GOT to do The Postman.
March 27th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
OH COME ON!!!!
I distinctly remember seeing this movie shortly after it was released on video. And I remember that I thought it was one of the Worst. Movies. Ever.
Drink your own pee??? Drink your own pee???
Surely there is some way to rig a little evaporator using a metal sheet over just a bit of sea water, a very lo-tech desalinator which would let you drink WATER! Not a lot mind you, but WATER. And I remember that the pee-drinking alone made me see every other ridiculous mess in this movie–like the possibility that paper had survived the centuries of water covering everything. I remember saying, gosh, I wonder how much paper they’ve pulled up from the Titanic. All of these incongruencies made this movie torturous, almost impossible to finish. It basically turned me off Kevin Costner for good.