Film of the Week #11 - Tremors

Karl Hungus

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100814/

Great mix of Horror and Comedy, with plenty of action thrown in too, definetly a very good film, and probably one of Kevin Bacon's high points.

Personally, I'm a little conflicted about this, on one hand it's very much a movie that I've enjoyed watching numerous times, but on the other hand, I couldn't fathom it losing out to The Terminator this week. Still, it's a great film, and deserves its due.

dr.bollocko

Ick. Well. i guess it does have that goddamn cult following.

Karl Hungus

dr.bollocko wrote:

Ick. Well. i guess it does have that goddamn cult following.

I take it then you're not overly enamoured with the film?

Why, pray tell?

gandalf

Well I think its a pile of ****e myself. Not sure film of the week is really working quality wise if this is the direction its taking.

bluto63

Yeesh, if this is everyones attitude towards it, I don't know if it's worth a look...

Karl Hungus

gandalf wrote:

Well I think its a pile of ****e myself. Not sure film of the week is really working quality wise if this is the direction its taking.

Perhaps not, but perhaps this is a hotter topic than some previous films that everyone would be in agreement about?

Carcharodon

I think its a good discussion to have, on one hand you have the people that love it for the reasons such as;

It was a sleeping hit in a sense, most people probably didn't hear much about it before waching it and were surprised how fun and easy it was to watch.
Kevin Bacon and the other characters were excellent lively characters, granted they may not have depth but they dont need to, lots of films try too hard to do that and it ruins them.

Its a film i could watch any time and enjoy it, it works well that its not too bloody and alot of the suspense and action is without seeing the the creatures too much, characters are not too stupid either, is not just mindless fun, alot of the situations you could see yourself acting the same.

Its Jaws on ground for gods sake, how couldnt people like it....

People probably dont like it beacause its not a brilliant film, it will never be up there with the greats but has a loyal enough following obviously....

dr.bollocko

Karl Hungus wrote:

I take it then you're not overly enamoured with the film?

Why, pray tell?

Nah the movie itself is a good laugh. It has a lot of things going for it. It is very likeable right from the start. You really want to get behind this underdog movie.
I mean its entertaining and keeps you engaged. The characters are off the wall and the dialogue is snappy and unreal.
It pokes fun at its own status as a low-budgeted genre movie and all that.

Its definitely one of those all in good fun monster movies.

I guess I kinda figured it for the type of movie to fade into relative obscurity, like Bugbuster say, rather than be latched onto as some sort of strange cult success. I really dont see why its any better than many of the other forgettable movies of this style out there. And because its flaws are really obvious, its just hard to see it being anyones top movie, movie of the week is a bit strong. Maybe "Cult movie of the week."

Crucifix

I love Tremors, and I definitely think everyone should see Tremors at least once in their life.

Carcharodon

dr.bollocko wrote:

It pokes fun at its own status as a low-budgeted genre movie and all that.

"Cult movie of the week."

Was wondering was it actually that low budget, thought it was a bit of a big hollywood flic that failed to make it at the box office but was a gradual success over years.

"Cult Movie of The Week", i am wondering is it even a cult movie, what is a cult movie ? What would peoples definition of Cult Movie be ?

Tusky

I love tremors. It may well be one of those films that you have to see as a young'un to appreciate. I must have seen it a dozen times at this stage and would glady watch it again anytime. Very easy to watch, action packed, witty lines, cheesey acting and great monsters. Quality 80s movie.

Basq

How could people not love 'Tremors'?!

Absolutely fantastic - Fred Ward and Kevin Bacon chemistry is what makes the film!

Even the sequels weren't bad.. well, i saw the first two sequels and they were perfectly watchable.

Makaveli

Why can't the film of the week be a fun no-brainer? If people enjoy I don't see the problem.

It doesn't have to be some prententious **** arthouse film that only twelve people have ever seen and it's only discussed by people on the internet.

To say that film of the week isn't working quality wise because you don't like a film is the real pile of ****e imo.

Anyway, Tremors is just great fun to watch. Yeah it's not Oscar winning material in any sense but films are there to entertain us and this does a hell of a job doing that.

Creature

Tremors is a fantastic film. I'd say its the one film I've seen more times than anything else and the only one whose script I know almost perfectly off. I love it, and i don't usually like comedy/horror films.

Aedh Baclamh

"prententious **** arthouse film"

Nice attitude, keep it up.

I think film of the week is acutually working quiet well. I said it before and I'l say it again, the more unusual the choice the more debate that is generated.

For me Tremors remains one of the most unashamedly fun films I have ever seen. Full of great performances, characters, situations, come to think about it every aspect of the film is perfect.

Anyone see the three sequels? And if so are they worth getting, as my local Xtravision has the sequels in the 2 for 20 offer.

Creature

Deleted User wrote:

rs, situations, come to think about it every aspect of the film is perfect.

Anyone see the three sequels? And if so are they worth getting, as my local Xtravision has the sequels in the 2 for 20 offer.

The first and last sequels are good but I thought the middle one (Tremors 3) was very poor.

Tusky

The poster is great too.

BlitzKrieg

about bloody time (took 11 weeks since I nominated it )


Tremors is excellent.

It feels like a buddy cop film with the two main characters, but also a tonque in cheek monster film. Its outrageous comedy moments are delivered with excellent timing.

It may not be a great work of art but like The Princess Bride ( a previous winner) it delivered in entertainment by the bucketloads, which is something some films aim for.

Ghost Train

haven't seen it in a long time, but do have fond memories of it.

Kind of old fashioned monster movie with basic special effects, but thats probably what adds to it

Creature

Creature wrote:

The first and last sequels are good but I thought the middle one (Tremors 3) was very poor.

Was bored around 10ish so I took a trip to town and picked them up. Got a second copy of Tremors also. This way if it breaks or someone takes it I wont have to search high and low for a copy.

Gillie

Loved it.
Simple fun.

gandalf

Makaveli wrote:

Why can't the film of the week be a fun no-brainer? If people enjoy I don't see the problem.

It doesn't have to be some prententious **** arthouse film that only twelve people have ever seen and it's only discussed by people on the internet.

To say that film of the week isn't working quality wise because you don't like a film is the real pile of ****e imo.

Anyway, Tremors is just great fun to watch. Yeah it's not Oscar winning material in any sense but films are there to entertain us and this does a hell of a job doing that.

What pretentious arthouse **** films have been nominated well, give examples.

I never said Tremors wasn't fun but calling it a film of the week is a bit strong, I wouldn't even call it a cult film, it's like alot of films from around that time a braindead fun timefiller that you rented from the video store.

I'd consider something like Happy Gilmore to fit your description of "great fun to watch. Yeah it's not Oscar winning material in any sense but films are there to entertain us and this does a hell of a job doing that" but I wouldn't have the cheek to nominate it as a film of the week.

Why do people assume that the film of the week has to be some critically acclaimed piece of high art?

I assumed that any film is quite entitled to be nominated, be it Schindler's List or Eight Legged Freaks.

The one thing I despise is cinema elitism. Every film deserves to be rated on its own merits. Take a lot of film clubs, which will only show art house films. My local one refused to show Pan's Labryinth and Old Boy because they were too popular. Yet they've show Hidden twice

spacecoyote

I think its more than worthy of its film of the week status! Its a great movie, which is fun & entertaining to watch. Its got some of the most lieable characters I've ever seen in a movie, the two leads bounce off each other perfectly!!!

Tusky

gandalf wrote:

What pretentious arthouse **** films have been nominated well, give examples.

I never said Tremors wasn't fun but calling it a film of the week is a bit strong, I wouldn't even call it a cult film, it's like alot of films from around that time a braindead fun timefiller that you rented from the video store.

I'd consider something like Happy Gilmore to fit your description of "great fun to watch. Yeah it's not Oscar winning material in any sense but films are there to entertain us and this does a hell of a job doing that" but I wouldn't have the cheek to nominate it as a film of the week.

Id have to agree with Darko on this one Gandolf. If anything, film of the week is there for people to get ideas of what to watch next and also to promote discussion. From viewing this thread alot of people havent seen tremors and I would bet, when they watch it becaause of this thread, they will enjoy it. Im really glad Tremors got nominated as some of the other films were a bit too obvious.

Makaveli

gandalf wrote:

What pretentious arthouse **** films have been nominated well, give examples.

I never said Tremors wasn't fun but calling it a film of the week is a bit strong, I wouldn't even call it a cult film, it's like alot of films from around that time a braindead fun timefiller that you rented from the video store.

I'd consider something like Happy Gilmore to fit your description of "great fun to watch. Yeah it's not Oscar winning material in any sense but films are there to entertain us and this does a hell of a job doing that" but I wouldn't have the cheek to nominate it as a film of the week.

Only one part of that post was actually directed at yours I should have structured it better.

You didn't say it wasn't fun, true, you said it was a pile of ****e which would suggest you didn't like it all.

Anyway, I don't think any arthouse films have been voted in yet but my point was there's a vibe of elitism being held here that suggests only bona fide classics deserve to be even considered for film of the week.

I never said Tremors was a cult film either. Yet again calling something cult is pigeon holing it into a bracket again. Why do we have to be looking at niche films?

Film of the week is subjective, there will rarely be a time when everyone agrees on the choice but if enough people vote it in what right does it give anyone else to discredit that choice?

Why wouldn't you nominate Happy Gilmore? Because it's not a film that will go down in cinema history as a classic? If film of the week is just going to be the same old films that you see on the IMDB top 100 then what's the point? Variety will make it more valuable in the long run.

You could nominate The Godfather and have everyone vote for it, great but how many people have already seen it? Stepping outside that box you've got a better chance of something being nominated that you haven't seen.