[Chris Eco]

( Blues Bros. 2000



Elwood Blues: Uh, ma'am, we're the Blues Brothers. We do blues, rhythm and blues, jazz, funk, soul, we can handle rock, pop, country, heavy metal, fusion, hip hop, rap, Motown, operetta, show tunes, in fact, we've even been called upon, on occasion, to do a polka. However, Caribbean is a type of music, I regret to say, which has not been, is simply not, nor will ever be a part of this band's repertoire

vs.

(25) The Village



Ivy Walker: Sometimes we don't do things we want to do so that others will not know we want to do them.

[National Champion Chris Cole]

I never saw Blues 2000. I did see Village. While it won't make any of my Top 25 lists in any genre it wouldn't make it in Worst either.

[Stu]

Not seen either. Will trade a vote for one in the Animation category

[Krydor]

Nothing better than shitting over the bloated corpse of John Belushi. The Village I have not seen, nor will I. Based on that, BB2000 gets the vote.

[The Jewish Cunthead]

krydor said:

Nothing better than shitting over the bloated corpse of John Belushi. The Village I have not seen, nor will I. Based on that, BB2000 gets the vote.

What he said. I don't care how bad The Village is, there's no way it's worse than BB2K.

[Lucky]

I still contend that neither of you hate the movie but merely the idea. And I think that's a silly thing to judge the actual film on. The film was just the same basic iconic scenes redone, kickass music numbers, and bigger car crash. And that's all I wanted.

I didn't like the Village and M. Night pisses me off, but I can't say I hated it. That was the most obvious and dud of shockers M Night's ever done and that's saying a lot. Its clear he knew the ending was obvious and he tried to swerve the viewers just before revealing it. Lame. But not one of my worst.

But I only own the soundtrack of one of these.

[The Jewish Cunthead]

No... I hated the movie. Landis tried to sell the duo of Ackroyd and Goodman as a re-packaged Ackroyd and Belushi and it flat out SUCKED. It wasn't funny, the singing wasn't as great, and the car stunts were just too cartoonish (yes the irony of that statement is not lost on me when talking about the original movie's stunts.)

[Moreofabreadguyanyway]

The Village probably sucked more, but I haven't seen it. 2000 was so bad it ruined the original Blues Brothers for me.

[punk/core]

The Village was the worst pile of shit I've ever fucking seen, so this one is pretty damn easy for me.

[Lucky]

fsolomon75 said:

No... I hated the movie. Landis tried to sell the duo of Ackroyd and Goodman as a re-packaged Ackroyd and Belushi and it flat out SUCKED. It wasn't funny, the singing wasn't as great, and the car stunts were just too cartoonish (yes the irony of that statement is not lost on me when talking about the original movie's stunts.)

Goodman wasn't Belushi's replacement. The original plan was for Goodman and Brother Zee, Jim Belushi. Belushi couldn't do it (and what a dick for not making it happen for his brother despite owing his career to him) and Joe Morton was added as Cab's son. Landis knew he couldn't replace Belushi so he added both guys. And really, he didn't choose them. Both had already taken the roles on SNL and tour. And personally I can say that Cab Blues > Zee Blues and I own a Zee/Elwood album.

Morton played a much larger role musically than Goodman. Goodman was comic relief, name power, and the fact that he was already Mighty Mack. Landis didn't choose him. Goodman did "Looking For a Fox" which kinda sucked. Morton did "John The Revelator" with Sam Moore, Taj Mahal, and James Brown. And he shared the lead with Akroyd on "Funky Nassau" and "Turn on Your Love Light" while Goodman just did backups and small parts. Morton was a very different singer than Belushi but quite good in his own right. Better as a pure singer if not performer.

Plus, we get Aretha and James Brown returning and add BB King, Wilson Pickett, Sam Moore, Taj Mahal, Eddie Floyd, Erykah Badu, Jonny Lang, Blues Traveler, and THE FUCKING LOUISIANA GATOR BOYS! That's a bigger lineup and for the loss of Ray Charles, Cab Calloway, and (kinda) James Brown we get BB, Moore, Floyd, Pickett, and the Gator Boys.

Music wise the problem isn't Belushi > Goodman. Because Goodman was good enough and Morton was great. The problem was that Belushi > Aykroyd. And Elwood stepped up as the lead man and singer. Otherwise the guests were arguably better and Morton/Goodman were solid. It was that upgrade of Aykroyd that hurt because he's really not that good. And Paul Schaffer got back into the band and he's the guy who basically formed the Blues Brothers.

Oh, and "Turn on Your Love Lights" was considerably less than but "How Blue Can You Get" and "New Orleans" did fine by me to make up for that.

I'll grant you the movie wasn't funny at all. It failed as a comedy. Nailed as a musical. Ok as a homage.

[creepy]

Ain't seen either.


Since you guys loved Blues Brothers and hated Blues Brothers 2000, it would probably be the worst movie that I've Ever Seen So I'll vote it.

[chretienbabacool]

Here's my deal with Blues Brothers 2000. Movie was crappy, music was insanely good. As Lucky said, the guest musicians were a 1,000 times better and made for one of the best soundtracks of any movie.

So yeah, movie=suck but I can't call this the worst movie ever with such great music, because the music is why the movie was made, so in that respect it succeeded.

[Krydor]

No idea this was the "awesome soundtrack" album showdown. If it were, then Flash Gordon wins. This is shitty movie showdown, in which people rape corpses of beloved entertainers.

[Lucky]

It was a musical. Ignoring the soundtrack is ridiculous. I'm not saying the CD I have playing. I'm saying the more than half of the film that is devoted to music numbers.

[Krydor]

Musicals, by their very nature, can get away with a whole crapload of stuff you would never see in a real movie. You know, spontaneous dance numbers and stuff. The movie itself still can't suck.

[Lucky]

Look, there's a basic thing I and CBBC are saying. Blues Brothers was a musical. To fail to at least consider that and what constitutes a musical (good and bad) when judging it seems silly. This is the equivalent of me saying "sure, the action in (random Arnold or Stallone film) was kick ass but dear God did you see that acting?! Horrible movie!" To judge half the film and ignore the good half just seems unfair. Especially if that half you're ignoring is what the movie clearly put its focus on and hoped to deliver.

And like I said, you seem to to object to the idea of the movie far less than the execution.

[Krydor]

Ok, what constitutes a good musical? Top Hat and Grease. There are your benchmarks. Hell, even Hope and Crosby's Road movies fit as "Musical Comedies".

[chretienbabacool]

Musicals should have good music and good dancing. This movie had that. It also had crappy parts, but I think the good music parts dilutes the crap parts enough so as to not warrant worst movie ever status. Let's make it even more simple:

Blues Brothers wanted to be a musical and partially succeeded by having good music.

The Village wanted to be horror and completely failed in every respect.

To me, you should judge movies based on intentions of the director.

[Lucky]

Exactly. BB200 is not a good movie. Its bad. But it has genuinely reedemable value and succeeded in at least part of its goal. There wasn't enough good to outweigh the bad but sure there was to take it away from "worst of all time." In contend, the only way you can call it worst is if you're a big Blues Brothers fan and are angry/disappointed at the bastardization. But there's tons of films that gave less to its audience than BB 2000.

[punk/core]

It seriously blows my mind that there are people who have seen The Village, and aren't voting for it. I don't care how badly Blues Brothers 2000 strays from the original. Hate a movie because it fucking sucks-- not because it doesn't live up to some expectation you had.

Think about it this way: If the original Blues Brothers didn't exist, would there still be such a hatred toward the sequel? Probably not.

But The Village? Fucking God damn Jesus ...that movie was piss piled upon shit piled upon a mother aborting her own twins.

[williamssl]

So let me get this straight: you're arguing for rationale logic on how to vote for movies here (look at them for what they actually were etc) - yet you use a "I'm voting against whatever conservatives vote for" in the Glitter/9-11 matchup?


So I guess you won't mind if I vote for Blues Brothers using the FLAWLESS LOGIC of "I'm voting against whatever Gay Mexican Dodger Fans vote for"? Thanks for helping me out here.

[punk/core]

I only posted that thing in the Glitter thread as a semi-joke because you got mad at people not giving a reason for voting for that movie.

[Chris Eco]

punkerhardcore said:

But The Village? Fucking God damn Jesus ...that movie was piss piled upon shit piled upon a mother aborting her own twins.

Eloquent. I voted with you.

[Chris Eco]

Ooh....I'm tempted to leave this open. But it is past deadline...message me if you want it reopened. Until then, Blues Bros. 2000 advances to face House of the Dead.

[punk/core]

Actually, can we just start the entire contest over? I forgot to nominate a bunch of movies that just plain suck when compared to Citizen Kane, The Godfather and Casablanca.