Don't Americans care anymore about a quality theater-going experience and therefore are willing to spend their hard-earned money for useless, idiotic drivel like that?
Isn't the theater-going public being duped by Hollywood who puts in big name stars like Travolta, Macy, Lawrence, Allen (and gives them a big payday) to attract an audience to a movie that is as forgettable as last night's bad dream?
2007-03-05 03:15:47 · 11 answers · asked by GeneL 7 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
Great comments so far everyone...
just the sort of diverse responses I was "phishing" for.
2007-03-05 03:38:37 · update #1
Ok. This movie is NOT quality entertainment. But I agree that the job of movies is to take you away from everyday life for a couple of hours. If this movie does that for you, then it has succeeded. But DONT call it quality.
2007-03-05 03:56:52 · answer #1 · answered by SLUG 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We go to movies to be entertained for a couple hours. I'm sure they didn't make this movie thinking it will win an academy award.
I went and saw Wild Hogs this weekend and loved it!!!! I laughed through the whole movie. I haven't seen anything that funny since "Oh, Brother, Where Art Thou".
My favorite movies are dramatic, but sometime you just need a good laugh and Disney always delivers.
It was well worth the money I spend and I may even see it again, and will buy the movie when it comes out on DVD.
2007-03-05 04:26:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I heard someone refer to it as a "crowdpleaser." I think that's true. It appeals to people who just want a little diversion. It won't appeal to the art crowd. That said, I think there's room for something like "Wild Hogs" in the landscape. I love artsy films as much (or more) than the next guy, but sometimes it's fun just to enjoy some harmless fluff.
2007-03-05 03:56:53 · answer #3 · answered by Film Jedi 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think wild hogs will be remembered as one of the greatest movies of all time. Seriously its probably doing well not only b/c of the stars in it, but b/c it is marketable to a cross section of people. Martin Lawrence being in it will get blacks to go see it also.
2007-03-05 03:20:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I would much rather pay for "idiotic drivel" that takes my mind off of the problems we see on the news every day, than some socially-concious movie. I recently saw Syriana with George Clooney- afterwards I was like, "Thanks, yeah, like I didn't know there are people in the US getting rich over oil in the Middle East."
I WANT to go and see silliness and laugh. It is MY hard-earned money, and I will spend it however I please. Thank you very much.
2007-03-05 03:21:16 · answer #5 · answered by tweetymay 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I don't see any harm in a movie that is out to make people laugh. I know I'd rather see a funny movie than a movie that is scary or full of violence. Maybe you should go see it...you might enjoy a few laughs.
2007-03-05 03:24:56 · answer #6 · answered by LG 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
If you follow the box office, most number one movies are drivel. "Nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the American people." - H. L. Mencken
2007-03-05 03:26:27 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
You have a lot of nerve to ask that question here. What exactly do you think quality entertainment is.........Look at what kind of society we have become thanks to the internet.
2007-03-05 03:26:41 · answer #8 · answered by Outside the box 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
seriously, but there are a lot of middled age men out there, and motorcycles intrigue them
2007-03-05 03:18:07 · answer #9 · answered by fourcheeks4 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
never heard of it. maybe it was number one because there was nothing else good out there.
2007-03-05 03:18:09 · answer #10 · answered by MarcusChi 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋