“Cocktail” isn’t the worst film to be featured in Eric’s Bad Movies at Film.com, but it is among the most boring and emotionally hollow. If anyone other than Tom Cruise (at the height of his popularity) had starred in it, it would have been a made-for-USA Network special.

Someone e-mailed me to ask that I reinstate the “guess next week’s movie” game, and I explained to him why I had stopped. (It was because I wasn’t working a week ahead, so I often didn’t know what the next movie would be.) Then that person posted a comment last week imploring me to reinstate it, as if I hadn’t already explained its absence to him privately! So that person is dead to me and can’t guess anymore. We don’t tolerate cheekiness around here.

Anyway, next week’s movie is from the latter half of the 1990s and stars two people who had (and still have) music careers (separately — they’re not a duo) but became famous for their acting. One of them is definitely more famous now for acting than for music, while the other could be argued either way (but I’d lean toward acting). A third cast member is an Oscar-winner who has a close relative who’s also an Oscar-winner. A fourth cast member was in a famous Oscar-winning movie, though he himself did not win one. A fifth cast member has been nominated for an Oscar, but for writing, not acting. Make your guesses below, if you so choose.

“Jaws: The Revenge” has been one of the most requested films for Eric’s Bad Movies at Film.com, and I’m pleased to announce that its day in court has finally arrived. My on-the-ball editor over there even went to the trouble of locating the film’s nonsensical, explosive climax on YouTube and has included it with the column.

One of the reasons I put this movie off for so long was that it came out in 1987, and I’ve already covered three films from that year: “Superman IV,” “Over the Top,” and “Masters of the Universe.” The last two were back-to-back and just a few weeks ago, so I wanted to put some distance between them and “Jaws.” Ideally, I’d like to hit a film from every year since about 1980, just to keep things broad and wide-ranging. In the meantime, was 1987 the worst year in the history of film? You’d think so.

This week’s edition of Eric’s Bad Movies at Film.com features a movie starring Jean-Claude Van Damme … and Jean-Claude Van Damme! It’s two Van Dammes for the price of one in “Double Impact,” about twins separated at birth who reunite to kill the guys who killed their parents. Presumably, the children of the now-killed killers will also band together to kill the Van Damme twins, and the circle of life continues. Read (and comment!) all about it at Film.com.

If “Grease” was “the one that I want,” its sequel is “the one that I had to watch in two one-hour chunks because I couldn’t stand to sit through it all at once.” Yes, it’s “Grease 2″ week for Eric’s Bad Movies at Film.com. Enjoy.

Someone correctly guessed this last week. Good for that person! A few people also guessed “Jaws: The Revenge” (aka “Jaws IV”), which fit the criteria I gave but didn’t happen to be the right answer. I promise that film will appear in Eric’s Bad Movies soon, though.

(Another guess was “Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2,” which didn’t quite match the clues. Its star, Dennis Hopper, has since been nominated for one Oscar, not multiple Oscars.)

No guessing game for next week because I’m not sure which movie it’s going to be. So we’ll all be surprised together!

Oh, and thanks for posting comments about “Grease 2″ at Film.com rather than here. It doesn’t take much to become a “most commented” article over there, so I appreciate the boost, as it makes my bosses think I’m more popular than I am.

When I first announced “Eric’s Bad Movies” a few months ago and asked for suggestions, “Masters of the Universe” was one that came up many, many times. And with good reason! It is a very silly movie, and it is the subject of this week’s edition of EBM over at Film.com.

As I mentioned last week, if you want to post a comment about the column, I would love it if you’d do it at Film.com rather than here. The Film.com overlords smile upon us more favorably when our articles get comments.

Now for the guessing! The subject of next week’s edition of “Eric’s Bad Movies” is a sequel from the 1980s whose star has since been nominated for multiple Oscars. Place your bets below!

Look, I could sit here and make excuses for not having a new “Snide Remarks” this week. But I respect you more than that! (As far as you know, anyway.)

Actually, I had two different columns on the ol’ word-processing assembly line at various times and was never able to massage either of them into a presentable condition. I’m all about quality, you know. So they will have to wait until next week.

As a minor consolation prize, please accept this list of four recent Film.com articles that you might find enjoyable:

Some Ideas for the New Hannah Montana Movie - They’re making one, you know. Not a concert film, but an actual movie. *shudder*

Three People Crazier Than Mike Tyson Who Need a Documentary - To experience the article the way I originally wrote it, change the very last word of the second paragraph from “murdered” to “raped.” See? Much more awful my way.

Hey, Internet! Stop Running Movie Photos That Don’t Show Anything! - Self-explanatory.

A Careful Analysis of Will Smith’s July Superpowers - He’s invincible!

And hey, did you see this video of Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly spoiling the ending of “The Dark Knight”? It’s funny, and they’re only kidding about the spoiling. (Contains PG language.)

This week’s edition of “Eric’s Bad Movies” at Film.com features “Over the Top,” which has long been regarded as the “Citizen Kane” of arm-wrestling movies.

I’m astonished by how many bad movies Sylvester Stallone has made. I suspect this will not be his last appearance in “Eric’s Bad Movies.”

Oh, and I have a favor to ask. Would you mind posting your comments regarding the article at the article itself, at Film.com? I know, I know, you have to register a user name to post there, but comments are like gold nuggets for the writers. It’s a cheap way of making the Film.com overlords think that readers love us. Thanks, ‘preciate ya.

As expected, this week’s edition of “Eric’s Bad Movies” at Film.com is “Batman & Robin,” the disaster that brought the Batman franchise to a screeching halt 11 years ago. One of my rules for this column is that I don’t want to do films that I already reviewed, but I made an exception here because my original review wasn’t a proper one. It was a he-said/she-said thing with another writer at my college paper, and it hardly counts. Plus, ’tis the season, what with that new Batman movie coming out tomorrow.

By the way, one of the reasons I don’t want to use already-reviewed films for “Eric’s Bad Movies” is pretty straightforward: If it’s bad enough to warrant EBM attention, that means it’s bad enough that I don’t want to watch it again. Time had dulled my memory of how awful “Batman & Robin” is, but it all came rushing back when I rewatched it, compounded now by the fact that I knew what was going to happen. At least the first time had the element of surprise, that flavor of fresh badness. The second time was like re-taking a crap.

Next week: a movie starring someone who has already been featured in “Eric’s Bad Movies” as a director, and directed by someone who has a prior directorial offense on our list, too. Using those clues, the EBM archives, and IMDB, you could actually figure out exactly what next week’s movie is. The first person to post the correct answer wins … something. Possibly nothing. But it would be cool, right?

Dinosaurs, or at least their cheap-looking equivalents, are at the heart of this week’s edition of “Eric’s Bad Movies” at Film.com. It’s “Baby: Secret of the Lost Legend,” a throwaway offering from Disney in 1985 that stars William Katt, best known for playing the lead in TV’s “The Greatest American Hero.” He appears in the film shorn of his trademark curly blond afro, however.

Do other people approximately my age (33) remember this film? I never saw it, but I vividly remember the commercials for it, and the title and premise have always been at the back of my mind. Maybe it made a big impression on me because it involved dinosaurs, which are very cool to 10-year-olds. What I never realized at the time was that the movie is really, really bad.

Next week’s film will be timely and appropriate. That’s your only clue.

The “Eric’s Bad Movies” feature at Film.com is three months old now, and it’s time for me to request your help once again in coming up with appropriate selections for the column. Many of you gave suggestions when I first announced “Eric’s Bad Movies,” and I’ve used a few of them and plan to use a few more. So I appreciate your help! And now I want more of it!

The column’s archives are here, so you can see what I’ve already covered. Beyond that, I have a few rules for the types of films that are most useful. I reserve the right to break these rules (except #1 and #2) if I want to; they’re more like personal guidelines. For example, despite rule #3, I think there might be some “Batman & Robin” in my future. But if you’re suggesting titles, try to keep them within these parameters.

1. It needs to be bad. And not just bad, but really bad. Mediocre won’t cut it. A film that is merely mediocre is a waste of my time.

2. It must have been released in theaters. No straight-to-video releases or made-for-TV movies.

Continue reading…