*** Official LAND OF THE LOST Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

We are going to see this tomorrow. Doing a double feature. Starting off with "Land of the Lost" and finishing with "The Hangover". Should be a good comedy Saturday.

I'm wondering how many who hate it didn't care for the old show either. It must be better than anything from Season 3!!

At any rate, the rottentomato meter is 28%. :frowning: Although....that 28% (which the big Rog is a member) sound like me!!!!

My theater decided not to run it. I complained and they gave me a free matinee pass. Wow! I'm glad it didn't come here! I'll catch it later. Hee hee! I'm going to use it to see either UP or DRAG ME TO HELL. NOt sure which. I'm leaning toward DRAG...

What does that mean, exactly? They were scheduled to show it, but changed their minds? I've never heard of a theater doing that ("sorry, we're not running what shows in the newspaper/web site"). That has to be an indication that it's godawful.

Same happened at a theater near me; LotL was scheduled to be on three screens, and it dropped down to 2 so the web was wrong. They converted that other screen to "Up!" in 2D. I figured that was a VERY bad sign when showings were wiped off the board.

Yeah, they'd been showing the previews and all. I don't think there were any newspapers ads yet.

Here's the email she sent...

Our booker previewed and did not think it was worth opening now. We may play it off the break later this summer. I'm sorry for the inconvenience... May we offer you a pass for any matinee this summer? Please see the box office staff during our operating hours to pick it up. P..... We appreciate and thank you for your business.
Melanie ...
------Original Message------
From: James Perry
To: ...
Subject: LAND OF THE LOST
Sent: Jun 5, 2009 2:49 PM

Hi.

I have been waiting many months to see "land of the lost" and here's opening weekend and you're not showing it. Boo hisss!!!

Really...just wondering when it's coming so I can look forward to it again.

Thanks.



Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Wow. Just....wow.

Btw, this is NOT a film for children ................or adults far that matter

that is hilarious. i wonder if there will be any repercussions from the studio or distributor.

Theaters are not required to show a film. I'm assuming they had not yet signed an exhibition contract. Trailers come out way in advance of the completed film, so it's perfectly reasonable to think that they might have run the trailer before deciding whether to book the film itself.

My local theater runs trailers all the time for films that it does not end up booking (they only have two screens, so they'd either end up running very few trailers or changing films every release day).

I never knew that people viewed a trailer as a binding contract that the theater would book the film.

A lot of the independent theaters receive screeners to view about a week before they decide to open or not, and they are free to pass on a film.

Some theaters - parts of chains- make agreements to show a film, but they also reserve the right to change how many screens. This allows blockbusters to expand screens.. let's say AMC30 booked "Star Trek" and originally figured on four screens but went to six.. but it can hurt others.. let's say the same weekend they had Wolverine booked on 4 originally but reduced to 2. And so on.

But you can pass. Still, that's a great hilarious email. Too bad not enough others got the warning. The excerpts I saw from Lotl told me everything I needed to know.

This summer's Speed Racer

I just got back from seeing it. As a big fan of the original, I felt I had to see it on the chance it might be really cool.

It was ok, not bad for a summer-afternoon kind of movie, but it wasn't great. And now I don't know what I was expecting.

If the Matrix brothers had made it, would it have been better? If it didn't have Wil Ferrel ad libbing Polish jokes would it have been better?

I'm thinking the only way this film would have worked would have been for it to have been a serious, scary, maybe even R-rated adventure film -- but then it would have been a lot like Skull Island scenes in Peter Jackson's King Kong, so, maybe it was in a no-win situation.

I've got it -- if Bruce Campbell starred, and Sam Raimi directed, it would have worked. Tongue in cheek, but still scary. I could see Bruce taking on Sleestaks. Granted, Bruce falling back in time along with some modern artifacts has been done, but, it would have been interesting rather than only amusing.

Related note -- I didn't appreciate the CGI'ing of the sleestak's mouths. That's not what their mouths look like! Sleestaks were scary because they hissed. I don't recall them hissing in this film -- maybe they did but it was lost among the music and other sounds of the soundtrack.

The opening prologue was nice. Seemed like it was maybe a late addition to the story since later on, Marshall see the "suit" but a few scenes later declares they must be the first people there...

Anyway the film had problems. But it was mildly entertaining.

Holly was cute.

Hmmmm.......Speed Racer or Land Of The Lost..........which was worse?

I'll go with Speed Racer.

Close though.

The local theatre did just the opposite of some theatres mentioned here. They had no problem booking this film in, but couldn't bother bringing in "Coraline" or "Battle for Terra": films I would have liked to have seen.

I don't normally judge a movie entirely by its trailer, but this thing looked plain awful. I think anyone who states "Speed Racer" was worse than this is just looking to get a rise out of people who liked that film. "Speed Racer", in its trailer, showed that it had a storyline. The same can't be said for LoTL. The trailer made the film look completely inane and plotless. Of course, it does star Will Ferrel (who is talentless and unfunny) so I guess I'm biased right from the start.

This literally felt like you gave Will Ferrell $100 million to make a 90 minute SNL skit on "Land of the Lost". There are some goofy laughs, but the plot is so poorly thought out, it was just a mish-mash of scenes strung along from reel-to-reel.

I dream that this will end Ferrell's career. He's a horrible actor and not funny at all, I have never understood why people find him funny.

I agree. He leaves me utterly cold.

I am also not a fan of his work.

Jacob

Surely you're exaggerating. I didn't like your post, but I'd never hope it caused you to lose your job. Especially in this economy.

I think Ferrel is hilarious. Humor is subjective (like most things). The fact that he has a career at all means that millions of people disagree with you. Either you haven't seen this movie yet, and you're taking a negative position on something you haven't seen, or you went to see a movie by an actor you didn't like, which doesn't make sense and sets you up for disappointment.

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie.

(I thought his acting was just fine in Stranger than Fiction, btw.)