View Full Version : sci-fi network, you crazy bostards....

03-14-2005, 01:04 AM

wait for it....


sorry, just had to get that out. flipped this on last night... could... not... avert... blank stare....

the true story of how an escaped convict turns into a giant mosquito, sucking more blood in fifteen minutes than dracula does in a year. ridiculous from start to finish, with bad acting, bad f/x, bad story, basically bad everything, this is a sure-fire b-movie classic waiting to happen. highly recommended for those with absolutely no discriminating tastes.

there's just something satisfying about watching really bad movies. i'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that this wasn't based on any pulitzer-prize winning novels. :) i'm also guessing the producer had the option of buying new tires for his ford el dorado or making a sci-fi network movie, decided to throw them bones and see what happens.

03-14-2005, 01:16 AM
ah yes...the bad movies that top them all...

Army of Darkness is my personal favorite. :)

03-14-2005, 01:20 AM
My favorite really bad movie is Deep Blue Sea.

The scene where the scientist sucks brain juice out of a shark, dribbles it onto "cultured human neurons from an Alzheimer's patient," then shrieks, "they're firing! They're firing!"

That entire scene makes me laugh hysterically. They could retitle it "Bad Science." (Would it have been so hard to ask a someone who knew even a tiny bit of science if it was plausible at all? They couldn't have been more off the mark if they'd tried!)

Not to mention it's totally unoriginal. Another title for it could be "Jurassic Shark."

03-14-2005, 01:27 AM
[QUOTE=JanaLanier]My favorite really bad movie is Deep Blue Sea. [QUOTE]

Okay, I'll give you Deep Blue Sea. It's a masterpiece of a bad movie! Personally, my favorite seen is when one of the scientists says "We all have to stick together," and then promptly gets bitten in half by the shark that jumps out of the pool that he just happens to be standing above and the viewer can't help but note that the shark bounces- rather like a creation made of styrofoam...

The movie runs like that sentence. :)


03-15-2005, 08:47 AM
My husband's response to "Mansquito"...

"So bad it doesn't even have a Baldwin in it."



08-26-2005, 08:33 PM
Frankenfish is another one...

I laughed at it the entire way. THEN, I said to myself. "Self, if this crap can make it to publication / movie form, then so can mine!"

I felt better after that...even though the show actually killed some of my brain cells :)

08-27-2005, 07:30 AM
aw, 'frankenfish' wasn't all *that* bad. you should try watching some of the horror movies *i've* been watching lately (try 'vampire assassins' and 'legion of the dead' for the bottom of the barrel), makes 'FF' look brilliant. if you like 'lake placid' kind of movies, 'FF' won't disappoint. is the science tight? hardly, unless you believe the things they do on 'the red green show' is possible, lol (and, really, what nuclear scientist *can't* repair leaks to the core using duct tape?). they didn't even really try explaining things, which would have just been boring anyway. tonight's awesome fare will consist of 'rottweiller,' whose tagline is, 'eat. sleep. fetch. kill.'

there was something else recently by the sci-fi network with bruce campbell fighting space aliens. i only caught the very end of that, but, whoa!, did that look awful. like the guy on 'the soup' said, why is it the f/x on food network is better than the sci-fi channel's?

i'd feel lucky if my horror script had even the cheesy production values of 'FF'. sad to say, but it's true. 'FF' looked professionally done, at least. doesn't say much for the script, true, but unfortunately most low-budget horror flicks (low-budget='s under five million dollars) are written, produced, and directed by the same guy. sometimes that guy even does the music for it. probably caters it, too. considering he might direct while holding the boom, also, and it's pretty disheartening, lol. that's just it, people watch these really awful, poorly made horror movies and say, 'if *that* can get made, certainly someone will make *my* story!' thing is, unless you're willing to direct and produce it, it probably won't get made in a lot of cases, great story or not.

that sucks and blows at the same time. seems that just about the only big-budget horror getting made today comes from japanese remakes. things with a budget still aren't even that good usually. 'the ring two' probably was made on the cheap compared to a lot of other studio productions. at the same time, and this is just my opinion, but i venture to say horror movies have one of the best returns on investment around, particularly if you see how much it costs to make a movie like 'blair witch' (about thirty thousand, if i recall) and makes over $200 million. it's like the more money you drop into a horror movie over, say, twenty million, the worse it gets.

but, hey, there's a market for bad horror movies. just you have to be extra creative getting them made. it probably won't be just a case of sending a script in to a production company and, boom, it gets optioned at least. nah, you'll probably wind up directing it yourself after dredging up the funds to do it in the first place even *if* you have a production company behind you.

i think 'FF' came out great, all things considering. there's just no excuse for the sci-fi channel producing things that look worse than what an indie can get done probably with much less of a budget. (i knew 'FF' was going to be a higher production than what i usually watch based merely on the crane shot in the opening. watch enough bad horror movies and you start appreciating these little things, lol.)

08-27-2005, 07:39 AM
oh, btw, 'FF' is a scifi pictures release. go figure. alternate title is 'bayou.' you can find 'mansquito' on the shelves under another name, maybe with all the gore and guts they had to leave out of the television version.

08-27-2005, 09:27 AM
I have to be honest, I have a soft spot for B-movies. I was talking to my brother the other night and discovered he has the same soft spot, though he's taken it one level higher. He's started to seek them out and purchase the DVD's. His particular faves are the really old, really bad monster movies, like Godzilla meets Rodan.

I might have to see if I can't find this Mansquito for him for a holiday or birthday gift. Though Vampire Assassins sounds like it might be a slightly better option.

08-27-2005, 10:46 AM
here's a list of sci-fi picture's recent (?) movies:


wanna write for the sci-fi network but aren't sure what they're looking for? maybe i can help. warning: i have no idea what i'm talking about....

first of all, if it can't star david keith for whatever reason, it won't be made. if in your movie description it can't be said that '...played by the gorgeous so-and-so', that's not going to look good. remember your eye-candy, people!

now, about the science, be sure... ah, to hell with it, just make something up. doesn't matter if it's a real scientific principle or not. if the audience's suspension of disbelief hovers around the upper stratosphere, no problem. you can always slap some glasses on a gorgeous model, call her a scientist, and have her offer some shady explanation as to how microscopic space maggots can infect the frozen dinosaur you just resusetated (sp!).

you have to have some scientists in there, too. don't forget them! start you idea off with 'a team of xxx scientists....' the rest should write itself depending on the kind of scientists you use. marine biologists? sharks, giant octopus, frankenfish, what have you. if not scientists, you *must* have a team of elite troopers, preferably doing training excercises cut off from the rest of the world. (of the 18 movie descriptions on that page, i counted eight descriptions with 'scientist' or 'scientists' in them, and that's not counting the movies which suggest there *would* be a scientist involved and 'FF' in which there was a scientist of sorts, just not mentioned. you do the math. bear in mind it's the SCIENCE FICTION NETWORK, lol.) if your top team of scientists graduated from the uraguay university of paranormal-type stuff, the audience doesn't need to know that, do they? the key here is not to get caught up in the details, like plausibility. don't strain your brain, bub: writing stuff that makes sense will only confuse your audience.

now, consider the f/x at your disposal. these will cost in the buck fiddy range, so no massive space battles. in fact, expect your undead guy not to have much of a face because it was the f/x guy either spending that money on better f/x or a can of red bull. in other words, don't expect to be hearing from george lucas any time soon saying, 'my f/x company has been working overtime on your movie, and it looks great!' you will receive, however, the best f/x moderately priced off-the-shelf software can provide for eight to ten hours of working on it. hey, give the f/x guy a break: it's not easy working on your project *and* downloading pirated movies to sell, too. you won't have time to argue with him anyway, for as the writer you'll also be involved in helping to 'choreograph the filming of the giant f/x extravaganza for the film's explosive finale,' i.e. holding the bottle rockets at three in the morning in the middle of the desert while a couple of guys in parkas are still drunk from the night's partying. (get used to your night filming to 'coincidentally' revolve around bar time.)

don't be afraid to steal from vastly superior movies. we'll call it something else, like an 'homage,' or 'in the style of.' the producers will call it 'following the trends,' eventhough the movie shooting today is a rip-off of a twenty year old flick. see, you can never stop being creative, even when it comes to this.

short of ideas? buy a copy of any science magazine. pick any article as an idea. begin idea with 'a team of scientist....'

now, the hard part: coming up with something that distinguishes your awful movie from the other awful movies. gotta have that 'oomph.' don't go all shakespeare meets jerry bruckheimer here, just something the average schlub doesn't see every day, though every other day may be good enough. even if it's a ridiculous body count, that's cool. or ridiculously hot bodies. they won't say no to the swedish bikini science team, trust me. wanna seal the deal? give 'em huge guns.

the setting. it should be cold enough for women's nippples to harden up to cut glass *or* reason enough for them to go around nearly naked. most of the male leads with recognizable names aren't people you want to see with their shirts off, not anymore anyway, so keep that in mind.

animals are a good basis to use for villains, be they mutants, aliens, clones gone awry, or rabid.

*still* can't write one? jeez, you must be a really crappy writer. or a good one. if you must, steal my idea:

a team of scientists are startled when perfectly intact creatures start bubbling up from the le brea tar pits. except they're creatures no one has ever seen. after the army sweeps in to take control (doesn't matter here that the army has no real reason to do this, they just do-- see what i'm talking about that 'plausibility' thing having no bearing on things?), more and more creatures start floating to the surface until the worst of them all pops up... but it's not dead, it's hybernating! newly risen, it goes on a bloody rampage for, let's say, virgin flesh. hell, let's make the thing some kind of ancient god to some kind of ancient american indian tribe. hell yeah! this thing rocks already! you know what? let's add some archaeologists in for good measure. a *team* of archaelogists. so, the remnants of the scientists and army dudes (all of whom are very good-looking because only ugly people should die) hook up with the archaeologists to find a way to kill the thing before yet more people are fubar'ed. hm, let's say the lead scientist, some total hotty who just outgrew her role on a WB teeny-bopper show (don't forget the glasses) is g/f's with the lead archaeologist, but can their love survive when cap't. handsome of the u.s. special ops is on the scene?

invariably, the movie ends in a warehouse that's cheap to rent for the night. some stock footage of l.a. is good enough to get you into the desert, a producer's dream if it works out. don't forget the very, very, very end where the spawn of the creature comes up out of the goop. gotta think sequel here. for good measure, have the beast already preggers when she's brought back to life, so now there's even more reason to kill-- to feed her chillun'! damn, that's good stuff, son. dare i say pure gold? you now have perfect reason to kill the redneck soldier who shouts, 'i'm gonna kill all you tar babies!' gotta kill all the non-p.c. people, too. that redneck even, gasp!, smokes! so now, even the creature has something we can all feel sorry about. pathos may be out of the scope of most of my audience here, but that's a chance i'm willing to take with other people's money.

oh, hell no! i just thought up the perfect scenario. the lead archaeologist is a chick, too! they're girlfriend/girlfriend! man, i can't believe i almost forgot that. that way, it keeps 'em virginal yet hot, b/c guys don't really consider two chicks getting it on as having had real sex anyway (that reminds me of a story....). anyway, the archaeologist babe loves her girlfriend despite maybe them being on a break, but the scientist chick has a lot of issues with killing momma dinosaur b/c she desperately wants kids, too, so there's a connection there.

all i can say is... duh-am. hey, i gots a million of 'em. actually, they're all pretty much the same, just with different surface things. i was born to write for the sci-fi channel. and to make love, sweet, sweet love, baby.

08-27-2005, 06:58 PM
wanna write for the sci-fi network but aren't sure what they're looking for?

Maybe someone that uses proper capitalization? ;)

08-27-2005, 07:02 PM
My favorite cheesy movie is Anaconda. Not just the first one, which had cute lil' Eric Stoltz, weird Jon Voight and bad-acting J-LO, but the second one, AnacondaS, which had a whole bunch of people no one ever heard of. They're just fun to watch. Although the snakes looked better in the second one.

08-28-2005, 06:11 AM
capital letters... bah!

yeah, if you like 'anaconda', you'll probably dig 'frankenfish,' too.

08-28-2005, 10:07 AM
capital letters... bah!Oh, Preyer, you're just too darned proud of your laziness.

But it's pretty difficult to 1) believe you know what you're talking about when you refuse to use standard capitalization and 2) almost impossible to wade through your lengthy posts without it.

Sorry, but this writer wants to read text that's formatted according to generally accepted print standards.

08-28-2005, 10:32 AM
I second that, Pthom.

08-28-2005, 11:03 AM
Make that three! :P

Then again, this is just the internet, and for all we know, preyer holds an advanced degree in some science we've never heard of, and is intentionally trying to mislead us into thinking he's "dumb" hehe so that he can go and sell scripts about sexy scientists bringing zombies back to life for the purposes of world domination :D

08-28-2005, 03:15 PM
i've gone through the whole 'for gawd's sake, please use capital letters!' thing before. still, i expect my idiocy to show in the writing, not it's style. pride is a sin, one which i'm proud to say i don't indulge in. would that make more sense if i capitalized it, or is it just as ignorant either way? at least by not capitalizing it, i'm saving a lot of people the trouble of not having to read it for yet one more reason. i don't refuse to use capitals, i just don't do it. i can't believe it's taken people on a WRITER'S board this long to complain!

something else that's always amused me is people who capitalize my screen name, lol.

not being generally accepted anyway, can't say i'm going to start using caps. good gravy, wavy, i use paragraphs, at least. one baby step at a time....

'But it's pretty difficult to 1) believe you know what you're talking about when you refuse to use standard capitalization and 2) almost impossible to wade through your lengthy posts without it.' ~ oh, i agree. nothing to be sorry about. there's probably not much worth reading in my postings anyway, certainly not justifying slogging through 10,000 words just for a nibble of a good thing. that's why, when asked, i advise people to ignore my posts in their long-winded entirety. good lord, folks, save yourself the effort and just skip 'em! seeing as how only i amuse myself and there's little, if anything, of value in them, it's really a wonder i haven't been banned. someone's not doing their job, so i'll help 'em out and ban *myself* for, hm, how long? a week sound good to everyone? a month? permanently? y'all throw out some numbers.

(how many people thought i'd start capitalizing in this reply, if for no other reason to show that my shift key works? how many people think i'll start now? :))

08-28-2005, 08:23 PM
If you think being annoying is a reason to get banned on AW, you've sadly misinterpreted this community. It might get you put on lots of people's 'ignore' lists -- not mine; it's a luxury I can't afford to use if I want to truly keep on top of things around here -- but what other people do or do not do is up to them. Just as whether you choose to use capitals and standard formatting is up to you. Me? As long as you're not being inflammatory, I just skim your posts.

08-28-2005, 10:56 PM
My favorite cheesy movie is Anaconda. Not just the first one, which had cute lil' Eric Stoltz, weird Jon Voight and bad-acting J-LO, but the second one, AnacondaS, which had a whole bunch of people no one ever heard of. They're just fun to watch. Although the snakes looked better in the second one.
Some movies are so bad, they're good. Anaconda is not one of them - it's just bad.

Oh and btw, did you notice the waterfall that flowed upwards?

08-29-2005, 04:23 AM
and were i to use caps, you'd read them? nah, probably not. i mean, if you were a fan of what i had to say, caps wouldn't matter. sure, you'd want them, but it wouldn't stop ya from reading. that anyone skims my posts is fine, i don't care, it's just that other than using capital letters and the length of the posts (which i know are epic sometimes), i know i won't please everyone anyway. because i am who i am, were it not caps someone would complain about my use of commas or parentheses or how i don't use the quote feature or spelling or grammar or i use too many smilies or word choice or content or how unfunny i really am or how the screen hurts their eyes after reading halfway through or their asss hurts after sitting so long or....

am i on people's ignore list? well, capital letters have nothing to do with that. sorry you feel i'm an annoying person and a pain in your butt, birol. capitals and 'proper formatting' (whatever that is on a message board) won't change that, though. either someone suffers through my style in hopes i've something to offer, or they just say the hell with it and move on, catching anything they may have missed in other people's quotes. this is a good option, as it seems i'm one of the more quotable posters in that regard. i reckon kudos are in order for those people who read my posts enough to derive a quote from them.

08-29-2005, 06:10 AM
Some movies are so bad, they're good. Anaconda is not one of them - it's just bad.

Oh and btw, did you notice the waterfall that flowed upwards?

I love that part. Made my daughter watch it with me one night, and had to back up the dvd so she could watch it again. "Mom? Is that water going UP?" It's great. Combine that with Jennifer Lopez pretending to be smart, and you got a winnah!

08-29-2005, 10:04 AM
pride is a sin, one which i'm proud to say i don't indulge in.:ROFL:

08-29-2005, 01:14 PM
Ahhh.... good ol' SciFi network. What would we do without it?

I have a 6 yr old son who spends every other weekend with me and so, due to contractual obligations, I must watch every movie that contains sharks, dinosaurs or alligators. Needless to say, we watch a lot of SciFi channel fare.

The one thing watching these movies has impressed upon me is that alcohol must be a neccessary and very influential factor when closing a script deal...

08-29-2005, 01:54 PM
i try to slip something decent in a post every now and then, pthom. glad you caught it. i was afraid i wasn't being very witty there, lol.

i only caught bits and pieces of the anaconda movies. now i feel the need to watch it. thank for nothing! well, i guess i could spend my time worse than watching her slog around in the water in a tight t-shirt. i could paint my brown grass green. i could actually start work on my greatest invention, male crotch deordorant. i could make a 'friendly' razor for 'man-scapers.'

i caught a few sci-fi pictures on t.v. last night. i saw the last part of 'blood surf' and somehow managed 'pterodactyl,' and all i can say is, wow, they sucked. in the latter, i was surprised at the level of graphic violence. if bad everything were american soldiers in the desert wearing sunglasses during the 50's, these movies would be the atomic bombs detonated a hundred yards away. wait, that doesn't make sense. i truly should be a sci-fi movie writer.

a sample bit of dalogue from 'blood surf' based off my mtv-tainted memory (spoiler warning):

the giant croc is dead, impaled on a stalagmite (or whatever) that the last two heroes managed to avoid in their fall. everyone is dead, their friends eaten: all who's left is the young stud and hot aussie chick. having just landed conveniently in a jungle pool of water deep enough to stop their fall from forty feet but shallow enough to wade in, the dude manages to make his way to the far end and collapse in some extra-firm, king-size loam, face down and apparently injured.

the worried chick hustles up to him and rolls him onto his back, then leans over to give him mouth-to-mouth. he attempts to put his arm around her and laughs as she recoils.

'hey, you're not hurt!'

'never said i was. now that we've got our first kiss out of the way--'

'that wasn't a kiss,' she protests.

'no, it wasn't,' he admits looking dejected for a moment, then pulls her to him, 'but this is!' smooch, smack, slobber, drool. pan to the right to discover the croc wasn't dead, and has gotten away. granted, were i kissing this aussie hottie under the moonlight with her legs til tuesday and boobs that could lift the titanic, i might not notice the motions of a fifty foot croc twenty yards away thrashing about as it un-impales itself from an eight foot high spike of rock. that's the kind of guy i am, giving my undivided attention to the ladies. it's all about the women. that's the only reason i'd fight a fifty foot croc, to get me a little.

'pterodactyl' started off okay, albeit with terribly cliched characters. then coolio, as leader of a special ops squad tracking a rebel leader in the woods, shows up. yes, i said coolio. my favourite scene was when the soldiers had a firefight with a rebel camp, exchanging machine gun fire from about ten paces, and yet it still lasted for about a minute despite every single rebel standing around as were magick roots held them in place.

oh, man, these were just two bad movies, entertaining in their awfulness. i fell asleep during 'shark attack III,' so i might have missed a real gem there. i'm guessing not, though.

i really did try to watch the one with john rhyes-davis and the dragons, but i just couldn't. at one point where the usurper grabs the crown off the king's head, i believe the crown was literally made out of the thinnest copper available, no stronger than if it were a crown made out of cardboard wrapped in tin foil.

i understand the network making its own movies, but for the life of me i don't understand why they make the ones that only gives sci-fi and fantasy a bad name. does anyone watch the sci-fi channel? do you think their programming is just terrible for the most part, and whoever is in charge over there needs to find another job?

where's the sci-fi channel's behind the scenes look at aeon flux? where's the documentaries? the game shows? the quality programming, not just old episodes of star trek and really bad sci-fi pictures movies? the reality show about a trekker and a trekkie on a long-distance voyage to try and get george lucas to get a new indiana jones movie made? the contest 'get your movie made!' (it could possibly be no worse than some of the others.)? man, there's just a lot of things you could do with this channel and none of it's being done. i wonder what their ad revenues are like.

besides 'tripping the rift,' their schedule is horrible. 'beyond belief'? 'quantum friggin' leap'? okay, i know there's a following for 'QL', but come on, that's an old show! reruns are fine, but that's about all they do. 'the outer limits', 'the twilight zone'.... correct me if they're making new shows for the last two. can they not afford the syndication rights for 'buffy'? if they were serious about programming, they'd show 'red dwarf,' a classic show. 'ghosthunters' is a cool premise, though it bores me to be honest, but like 'scare tactics,' it probably costs less than two thousand an episode to produce.

they have some quality shows like 'battlestar galactica,' though. i'm not a fan of the stargate series, though there's a fan-base for those.

sorry for the rant. :)

09-10-2005, 12:33 PM
i understand the network making its own movies, but for the life of me i don't understand why they make the ones that only gives sci-fi and fantasy a bad name. does anyone watch the sci-fi channel? do you think their programming is just terrible for the most part, and whoever is in charge over there needs to find another job?


All right, here's the deal: you draw up the proposal, I'll put in the capital letters, the proper headings and subheadings and clauses and so forth, and perhaps a few brilliant (ahem) ideas of my own, and we'll send it on over to the execs, yes? I remember my excitement years ago when I saw that an SF channel was coming on - oh, you could have used me as a weather balloon, indeed you could, and then I saw what was on offer and you could have used me to sink a submarine.

Although I do love Battlestar Galactica (when they're not so busy preaching they forget to tell a story) and I'm a sucker for Ghosthunters. But that's about it. The movies? I already have acid reflux, thanks. Aren't there at least one or two scripts that cross their desks that actually have good plots, interesting characters, and some actual science to go with the fiction? I've checked their guidelines on other matters: they don't specifically say you must be writing MST3K-worthy material to be considered.

Besides, if they truly want to show something terrible, I would dearly love to see them put on Maximum Overdrive. The best worst horror movie I've ever seen!

preyer, I promise never to put caps in your screenname, okay?


09-10-2005, 03:55 PM
ah, well, shucks, ma'am, i'm flushed. ('flushed' deliberated used as an opening for those who'd use it to poke fun of ol' preyer here, heh heh.)

caps and clauses and all the rest? that's a big job. are you sure it wouldn't be easier getting a job translating chinese into arabic?

ya know, everyone likes something different. the thing is, most of the channels original programming movie-wise just appeals to the lowest common demonitor. it's as if they don't grasp the basic idea that sci-fi and fantasy people are pretty smart on average. nothing wrong with a guilty pleasure here and there, but where's the balance?

09-10-2005, 04:30 PM
I speak neither Chinese nor Arabic, alas, but trust me when I tell you I've done harder things than editing for people who can string a coherent thought together even if they won't use caps.

Balance. Hmmm. You've hit it precisely. They're putting forth nothing for the gourmands. Maybe we should circulate a petition to show them that a good portion of their audience, being SF fans, have several working brain cells, so they can stop dumbing down their programming so drastically....

Have you seen the ads for the latest Bruce Campbell made for SciFi Channel movie? The Man With the Screaming Brain. Now don't get me wrong, I do love Bruce Campbell, but this.... It seems like something they looked at and said, "Great, Bruce! Excellent script. Now all we have to do is remove all redeeming qualities and dumb it down so that those with only brain stem function can enjoy it."

I despair.

09-10-2005, 11:14 PM
i love BC, too. i think you're right, too, that just looks moronic. nothing against watching something, gasp, for fun, but i appreciate something a little better than average every now and then. for instance, i kept trying to rent 'the librarian', and they kept telling me it's not that great. one said it was along the lines of 'national treasure.' cool, i said, that's what i feel like watching after having seen some more serious movies lately. when i finally picked it up, the clerk warned me it's a dumb adventure, to which i said, 'not looking for 'the seventh seal' here.' (the movie was dumb popcorn, entertaining but cheesy and predictable.)

what cracks me up is the sci-fi channel's promos are better than most of what they show. why put all the production and thought into a dragon jumping from puddle to puddle just to play 'quantum leap' all day? lol.