Wait, one post talks about movies so bad they're good, and then one list has 48 HOURS. 48 is a very good movie. It has cult status but more of the same status as when it first came: a good movie. Very good. One of Walter Hill's best. And this movie, Hill production, is, to me, much better than STREETS OF FIRE, which is basically THE WARRIORS SIDE STORY, and even boring.
As for Blue City. I never got what's so bad about it. I find it more entertaining and less cartoony and contrived than DIE HARD or movies like that. I mean, it's a reach, to say the least, that a spoiled rebel with a basketball can turn the tables on professional killers (back by a powerful person) like he does, but I just don't understand why BLUE CITY is considered the kind of movie that sweeps the Razzie noms. If it were made today with Seth Rogen or one of those other one-dimensional actors doing an action with comic lines, it'd be taken seriously as ever. I think it's just that it followed THE B-CLUB, and for some reason the "Brat Pack" was so big, everyone wanted them to crash and burn. An action programmer like BLUE CITY isn't enough to ruin their ride... time and many more choices, or turning down the right movies, would do that in due time.
I don't know. I don't think this movie is great but, it's just... not that bad.
My Cinema Site at www.cultfilmfreaks.com
reply
share