GHOST MEAT: THE RANCID EDITION

 

So I pulled a George Lucas and recut an old short that needed some love. This is probably the grossest video I've ever made. Enjoy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DNZKsQTSdk

RICKSHAW LAW - PART 2

PART 2: "ONLY LAW FIRM"

In the wake of the rickshaw uprising, Rochester Lawyer Enzo Prosciutto unveils a dark secret about his past. Meanwhile, his beloved law partner H.P. Barnes also reveals a dark secret... about Prosciutto's past.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KLi3pifbyg

SHOOTING FROM THE HIP - "GOING GREEN"

SHOOTING FROM THE HIP - EPISODE 3

There are many ways to go green!

http://youtu.be/g_-70wZJYKA

BAD MOVIES THAT SHOULD BE SEEN (22 OF 100)

"Hercules And The Captive Women" (1961),
Dir: Vittorio Cottafavi

$$$ Unknown Budget vs. Unknown Gross $$$

I once wrote a whole 25 page essay on this movie... and no, I'm not kidding, and no, this one will not be twenty-five pages. To understand this film, one must be familiar with the Italian Peplum (or "Sword & Sandal Films" or "T & A Films") films that were popular genre through the late-1960s, even giving Arnold Schwarzenegger his first role in Hercules In New York. In terms of cinematic history, the Italians made hundreds of these cheap, Neo-Mythogical films, capitalizing on the popularity of biblical films like Ben-Hur and The Robe, but appealing to the drive-in movie crowd through through skimpy costuming and absurdist humor. One could go on for months breaking down what possible importance these films could have or you could simply watch Hercules And The Captive Women and pretty much sum up the main points... and maybe The Colossus of Rhodes, starring Rory Calhoun for kicks.

Firstly, I love this film. Maybe it's because I had to watch months of this schlock for a film course and this installment was at least the best of the worst. I won't even go into the grim details of how bad some were (Hercules Against The Moon Men), whereas this one nails all that was good about them in one movie. Depending on what version you see (I prefer the American), the film opens with a bar fight. Hercules and his entourage of skimpily dressed young men and a midget are overwhelmed by angry drunks. Meanwhile, Hercules (Reg Park, the most awkward and hilarious of bodybuilders to play Hercules) continues to enjoy his meal. Once finished, he casually pushes aside a group of men coming at him with a battering ram and leaves the bar with his friends, completely unscathed.

Upon their leave, they encounter a bright red... something. It's honestly very unclear what they are looking at in the scene, but it's very red, makes the sun shrink, and forewarns them of a dangerous army coming, that could destroy their beloved Thebes. Androcles, King of Thebes, brings this problem to the counsel and neigboring cities, but none can agree to help the king. Worried for his kingdom while he is gone, Androcles asks Hercules who will take care of his throne. Hercules rips the thrown off the floor and smashes it, proclaiming that the people shall build Androcles a newer, better thrown upon his return.

Now, the counsel scene is probably the only real "intelligent" part in the movie. A lot of the humor and farce falls upon being a reflection of the constant incongruity of Italian politics. Historically, the Italians have never had a working government. An example can be found with the good old Red Brigade right here. The country is so fragmented between north and south, struggling with class conflicts, language barriers, extremist political parties that these problems are generally reflected in their movies. In this case, this scene does it very comically, alluding to a fragmented government that cannot work together to stop a looming threat that could destroy them all. For further insight, you can read about The Christian Democrats and it just might make this sequence even funnier.

So with no one else to join them on their journey into the unknown, Hercules and Androcles are forced to go alone. But then, after a talk with his formidable wife, Hercules decides not to go with Androcles either and stay at home and rest. Without any support or fleet to join him, Androcles is forced to drug and kidnap Hercules to take him on their journey. When Hercules awakes on a ship at sea, he completely forgets telling Androcles that he would not be going, assumes everything is going according to plan, and takes a nap... It should be noted that Hercules actually spends the majority of the film unconscious. If not because he is drugged, because he is simply lazy. If not because he is simply lazy, because the task at hand is beneath him. One could argue that Hercules is a very apathetic hero, if not actually hero at all...

In fact, one could argue that Hercules is simply a device of destruction that one transports place to place and is only to be used when absolutely necessary. There are even more direct references this notion later on, but we'll get to that. Back to political references for now and the is littered with them. Logically, it's doubtful that many would have thought these films to be particularly political-driven given their nature, but Italian films are generally very political in their nature. This film in particular has tons of political allegories, but they don't all necessarily add up. For example, Hercules finds himself in the Lost City of Atlantis (when it was above water), which has a population of slaves, female sacrifices to the Gods, and a lot of subecjts diseased from some strange energy source...

Hmm. They wouldn't be in Atomic Age America, would they? No, no. They couldn't be. Because the superhuman guards dressed in black armor (that are also all identical) are clearly a reference to Nazi Germany... So does that mean that the filmmakers are trying to say America is the new Nazi Germany. Maybe. But that wouldn't make sense because at the end of the movie, when Hercules ignites the volcano and blows up Atlantis, that destructive imagery suggests that that must be a reference Hiroshima, Japan (or Nagasaki), which the Americans bombed, meaning that... meaning that...? Ah, f&%$ it.

The only commonality here is pretty much everything Hercules touches gets destroy and any heroics he performs just end in mass destruction, but he is still the film's hero. Whether or not the Italians were trying to make a bold statement about the United States, or Nazi Germany, or the events that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nothing is more bold than wearing those costumes and managing to keep a straight-face.

You really have to enjoy your bad movies to like this one. One of the film's highlights is when Hercules fights the shape-changing monster Proteus. The clip below is the closest thing I could find for a trailer and goes under one of the film's many names, "Hercules Conquers Atlantis."

For your viewing displeasure, Hercules vs. Proteus!

BAD MOVIES THAT SHOULD BE SEEN (20 OF 100)

"North" (1994), Dir: Rob Reiner

 

$40 million in Budget vs. $7,182,747 in Gross

I had seen North when it first came out in theaters in 1994. I was young, but remember enjoying it. Not until doing research had I discovered North is pretty much universally hated as a film. Both Siskel and Ebert nominated it as the worst movie of 1994 and many consider it to be one of the worst movies of all time. Wow... But to be honest, I don't really get the general hatred towards this film. Maybe my standards have dropped with my increasing age, but this is the first movie on my list where I really don't understand why everyone hates it so much.

One of the few things I can think of that I dislike about North is its opening credits. The film opens with a series of soft-focus shots of North's toys on his desk. Personally, I felt it looked cheap and did not reflect the tone of the film at all. If this was Rob Reiner's way of letting us know that we're watching a kid's film, well, thanks. Apart from Bruce Willis' lackluster voice-over work, I can't really say much else that bothered me about this movie, besides the ending, which we'll get to that...

So what is it that bothered everyone else so much about this movie? Well, firstly, the plot centers around a boy-genius named North (Elijah Wood) who is the picture-perfect son and envy of every family, except his own. Unable to cope with his insensitive parents, North decides to become a free-agent, causing a major media stir as the world follows in anticipation of his journey to find more fitting parents...

So, from what I've read from most reviews, people found the plot unrealistic. Okay. But it's a movie, and a kid's movie at that, so it's not really supposed to be realistic, is it? Secondly, North comes across as a bit selfish in his desire to find better parents... but when you have a nagging Julia Louis-Dreyfus (in a terrible wig) as your mother and Jason Alexander as a mid-life crisis father saying that he "found blood in his stool," well, I don't entirely blame him for wanting to explore his options. Thirdly, a lot of critics claimed that the film showed no respect towards parents and didn't treat the family unit as having any value. Maybe so, but if you were a kid growing up in the 90s, it's likely your parents found a great replacement for your babysitter. That's right. Television. And if you're parents were plopped in front of the TV all night until they got back, Bart Simpson and Al Bundy were more likely you're real babysitters; so in terms of knocking down good old family values, North didn't really teach us kids of the 90s anything TV hadn't already...

One thing I will agree with most critics on is that the characters of North are vulgar, callous, and superficial... Can't imagine a movie starring the cast of Seventh Heaven having that many gut-busters. In fact, North's portrayal of children reminded me a lot of the very precocious youngsters of Wes Anderson's movies. Critics also claimed the humor didn't seem intended for children... Maybe it wasn't. The blood-in-the-stool joke made by Jason Alexander did actually throw me off during my most recent viewing, but the 1990 Nicholas Roeg film Witches (based on a book the Roald Dahl) had children being turned to mice and killed, and that holds a rare 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. No one seemed to think that was too much for kids. The only difference between Witches and North is that violence is okay, but toilet humor isn't.

Humor aside, a lot of critics also claimed to find the movie offensive, especially in its stereotyping of, well, Texans, Samoans, The Inuit (featuring Kathy Bates in red face), The Amish, Africans, Chinese, French, etc... but  compared to a modern episode of Family Guy or American Dad, the film's cultural insensitivity is pretty mild by today's standards. For me, the most offensive thing about North was the ending. Turns out that it's all just a dream. Yep. The whole movie, complete with voice-over narration, was just one big dream. North had fallen asleep in the mall and his loving parents have been worried sick about him.The family is reunited and all's well that ends well... Just as an aside, if you've ever take a screenwriting class, that is the first lesson in how not to piss off your audience... not to mention the blatant endorsement for Fedex.

But all in all, it's a bit shocking to me how violently opposed people are to this movie. I didn't think it deserved that much disdain. Am I alone in this?


 
And for your viewing displeasure, Siskel and Ebert's initial and hateful review of North...

BAD MOVIES THAT SHOULD BE SEEN (19 OF 100)

"Maximum Overdrive" (1986), Dir: Stephen King

 

$9 million in Budget vs. $7,433,663 in Gross

From the a classic storyteller Stephen King , whom more often than not doesn't translate very well to film, comes the worst Stephen King adaptation ever, one that was made by King himself back in 1986. Based on his short-story "Trucks", Maximum Overdrive opens with Stephen King (one of his few movie cameos) going to use a bank machine which tells him "YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE." King looks to his off-screen wife and says "Hey, honey! Come on over here, sugar buns! This machine just called me an asshole!" Yep. That's the renowned master of horror's directorial debut right there...

In fact, Maximum Overdrive was King's first and last directorial attempt. According to King in an interview with Tony Magistrale, he was "coked out of [his] mind all through its production and really didn't know what [he] was doing." Well... it shows. The story of Maximum Overdrive is that a passing meteor leaves earth caught in its trail of strange radiation, somehow giving machines consciousness and making them attack humans... Yes, that is the best storyline the master of horror could come up with for his first movie.

The film opens by explaining the meteor and then cuts to a mechanical bridge seemingly malfunctioning, crushing and killing dozens. In the aftermath of this chaos - BOOM! - the rock-a-billy AC/DC score kicks in. Now, King has stated in the past that AC/DC is his favorite rock band and that he writes most of his books while listening to their music. And yes, a nice personal touch like that for his first directorial outing is appropriate, but that doesn't make AC/DC's music appropriate for a horror movie (and it isn't)... if a horror movie's even what you want to call this. Also, it should be noted that this opening sequence has some of the best pratfalls in film history.

That bridge scene only really serves to set up that technology has gone haywire. The story actually follows Emilio Estevez, a recently paroled prisoner, now working at the Dixie Boy gas station, a trucker dive owned by the sleazy Mr. Hendershot. As the usual parade of truckers arrive for their daily lunch (with their ridiculous-looking trucks that no sane person would drive), the arcades and cooking equipment in the restaurant suddenly come to life and turn on them. Soon enough, all the trucks in the parking lot are trying to kill them as well. Lucky for Emilio his sleazy boss doesn't just use the Dixie Boy to serve bacon and eggs. He also has a basement in which he pedals machine guns and rocket launchers.

So the impending battle between man and machine begins... and I don't know if it was intended to be funny or not, but it certainly was. This movie has several hilarious moments in it, some border-lining on absurd. There's a little league game that turns into a war zone when a pop machine starts firing cans at kids like a potato gun. At one point, a gattling gun attached to a cart rolls up and machine guns the restaurant, resulting in the most poor and awkward blood squids I've ever seen. And then of course, there is the defining moment of Emilio Estevez's acting career where him and a big truck with a goblin face discuss the situation. The way the scene is played out, Emilio's performance, the stupid goblin-face on the truck, there is nothing here except hilariousness.

All in all, for the master of horror's only movie outing, you won't be scared much (or at all), but you will get some good laughs... but definitely won't be scared.

For you viewing displeasure, King's cameo and the first scene of his directorial debut...

BAD MOVIES THAT SHOULD BE SEEN (18 OF 100)

"Highlander 2: The Quickening" (1991), Dir: Russell Mulcahy

 

$34 million in Budget vs. $15,556,340 in Gross

 
Oh, the cunning Franchise Killer. Yes, the Richard Donner Superman franchise and Tim Burton's Batman franchise were among many of its victims (arguably surviving, just to run the same course again), but some victims of this murderer of artistic merit never even had a chance. The Highlander franchise is definitely one of those victims...

Having aged greatly on my part and seen the first Highlander movie several times now, the most credit I can give the original is that it still holds up as a neat idea. Immortals walking amongst us to do battle in the streets with swords is pretty cool. The rest of the original is a bad 80s special effects film (looking a lot like a Queen/Pink Floyd video) with a soundtrack by Queen (arguably the best part of the movie). But in the end, Connor MacLeod (Christoper Lambert) conquered the bad guys, was granted the ability to live a normal life, and retired to Scotland. How could they ever imagine bringing the character back after all that? Well, they couldn't really, but did anyway, resulting in this giant, unimaginative, steaming pile of stool.

One of the charms of the first Highlander film for me was its narrative simplicity. Early on in the film, we are introduced to MacLeod, learn that he is immortal, and that the Kurgan (the unforgettable Clancy Brown) wants MacLeod's powers for himself. Four hundred years earlier, Ramirez (played by Sean Connery) gives us a quick rundown of the rules of the immortals, so the cards are on the table and we're set to take part in this badass game of elimination. Simple. Effective. To the point. The subsequent sequel, however, had to get fancy and throw all that simplicity out the window for stray cats to nibble on.

Highlander II: The Quickening is set in a future where the ozone layer has evaporated and a force field is the only thing keeping earth alive (invented by Connor MacLeod, who was an antiques dealer in the first movie and never mentioned anything about having a scientific background). Now much older, he is hated by everyone and treated like garbage for saving human existence... Ungrateful jerks. No wonder he's looking forward to dying. But suddenly Connor has a whole whack of problems when the evil immortals from his home planet come to earth to f%$& sh$% up... 

Wait. Let's back up a second. The Highlander is an alien?! Really?! Since when did that happen? The first movie made no point or hint of that. Most audiences would've thought "Wait, isn't the Highlander from Scotland?", hence the name Highlander and most of the first film taking place in Scotland, but no, this Highlander's apparently from Planet Zeist... So yeah, this second movie just slips in some crappy alien origin storyline as if none of us with a working brain would have even noticed. Now, apparently back on Planet Zeist, MacLeod and Ramirez (not the most alien-sounding names) were captured as part of some treacherous rebel group and exiled to be reborn on earth. How they accomplish that God-like feat (not to mention the evil immortals would've had to do the exact same thing for all the other hundreds of immortals who were somehow magically reborn on earth for the first movie) is beyond me. But all that aside, this entire subplot is, well, a rip-off Superman's origins... Yeah, I know. Who cares?

Anyways, led by everyone's go-to-casting-choice-for-a-villain, Michael Ironside, General Katana and these evil immortals somehow manage to penetrate the shield protecting earth's atmosphere. From there, they fail at killing a very tired, very old man, and accidentally restore MacLeod's powers of immortality so he can be young and handsome again. But while MacLeod does the old Highlander electric-light-show song and dance, following the advice he got on Planet Zeist, MacLeod screams out Ramirez's name. Then (somehow) brings his old friend back from the dead... so they can kill people and make hammy jokes about it... and then Ramirez just dies again...

Yeah, this whole movie is just a mess. As well as being one of the elusive Franchise Killer's many victims, it's also early signs of Sean Connery's inability to recognize a bloody awful script from the 1990s (having three of his films from that era on this list). The latter Highlander films aren't much better. From this one, I enjoyed seeing MacLeod as an old man (for fifteen minutes), learning insults of the future ("Hey, cheese-di$%!"), and enjoyed the future battle between Old Man MacLeod and the two meth-head immortals with jet packs. What I didn't enjoy was the lack of coherence for one, the fact that there was no gratuitous Highlander sex scene (as in the first, third, and fourth), and a sore lack of Queen soundtrack.

Two sequels followed this,  a bad TV series and some animated films. The franchise clearly peaked after the first entry and has been in a state of decay ever since. Last year, there was rumors of a reboot with Taylor Lautner  in the works, but those have disappeared, thankfully. I'll stick with my VHS copy of the original, thanks...Wait a minute. This franchise has for the most part sucked ass. Maybe it's ripe for a fixin'... or maybe not and just come up with something original.

And for your viewing displeasure, the opening of the movie including the Planet Ziest storyline, bad voice-over narration, and crappy special effects...

BAD MOVIES THAT SHOULD BE SEEN (17 OF 100)

"The Warriors" (1979), Dir: Walter Hill

 

$7 Million in Budget vs. $22,490,039 in Gross

 
It's funny to watch a movie like The Warriors, laugh my ass off, and then realize that the guy who made actually this has quite a dinstinguished career behind him. On top of this film, Writer-Producer Walter Hill had a hand in all the Alien films (Prometheus included), both of the highly underrated 48 Hours films, Tales from the Crypt (1989-96), the subsequent movies (the good and the bad), the little known Perversions of Science, and notably HBO's Deadwood pilot (as director), as well as Stallone's most recent attempt to prove he's not 67, the box office flounder Bullet to the Head... Not bad, not bad.

 
In its time, The Warriors was not well-received by critics, and there are clear reasons for that. In terms of its acting, yeah, it's pretty bad. The characters talk to each other without the slightest hint of human emotion. And the realism is a bit questionable. I mean, I live in a pretty rough neighborhood myself and I've never seen gangs dressed as both cowboys/Indians (The Warriors), KISS/Roberto Alomar (The Baseball Furies), or Roller Girl/Super Mario Family (The Punks, apparently)... So yeah, not exactly an accurate on the pre-Reagan youth...

 
And for that matter, the social commentary (if any) is a little shallow. I refer you to the subway scene where the gang encounters a bunch of rich kids coming from their prom (I assume). The rich girl looks at the poor girl's shoes and everyone goes silent. It's possibly one of the more empty, awkward, and blatant social commentaries I've seen in a movie and doesn't really create the social landscape as I think Hill intended...
 

So, for all these bad qualities, why even see The Warriors? I tell you. Because the first fifteen minutes of The Warriors deserves to be studied in f&%$ing schools. The topic should be "How To Execute a Perfect Story Set Up And Do It Right!"

The movie opens with a series of flash-cuts of all the city's street gangs informing one another that Cyrus, leader of the Gramercy Riffs (and a very Third Man-esque character), wants all the gangs to meet in Van Cortlandt Park, unarmed. Cyrus proposes a truce amongst the gangs so that they can start working together and take over the city. Swaying the crowd, Cyrus proclaims (in the movie's most quotable moment) "Can you dig it?!" The gangs all cheer Cyrus on as a born leader... that is, until a psychotic little punk named Luther (a young Uncle Jerry from Twin Peaks) shoots Cyrus and kills him..Chaos ensues and Luther and his gang (The Rogues) pin the murder on The Warriors, making them the most hated gang in the city and target of everyone's wrath...

Now that, folks, is what you call "a set-up." Within a small amount of time (exactly 13 minutes and 44 seconds), Mr. Hill makes sure the audience knows who is important (Cyrus), what is at stake (the truce), and what causes that to come crashing down (that asshole Luther); putting our characters in grave peril and smack in the middle of a situation that seems impossible to resolve... Ah, jeez, how they gonna get out of this? Well, if you're asking yourself that question, then Mr. Hill has done his job. Doesn't matter if the film sucks for the next hour or even ends with some stupid musical number, the set-up worked. Like a contractual agreement between the audience and the filmmaker, what was being sold was also purchased, even if it runs the risk of not being completely satisfactory. The potential is more attractive than the reality in the end.

 
The only two other movies I can recall having set-ups as tight as The Warriors are Die Hard and Winter's Bone. From its set-up to its climax, the movie offers some great and not-so-great action sequences, some interesting characters along the way, and most importantly, a constant need to see how these bad actors dressed in Chip 'n' Dale vests get out of this situation. Modern screenwriters could learn a thing or two from 70s cheese like The Warriors.

For your viewing displeasure, an ironic song choice for this sort of movie...

BAD MOVIES THAT SHOULD BE SEEN (12 OF 100)

"League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" (2003),
Dir: Stephen Norrington
 

$78,000,000 in Budget vs. $179,265,204 in Gross

 

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is one of the best/worst blockbuster films ever made. Based on the comics by famed Watchmen-writer (and part-time magician) Alan Moore, the film attempts to be Jules Verne's answer to DC Comics' Justice League. And for all intensive purposes, this idea probably looked great on paper, combining all these fictional characters in a similar way to the movie Tall Tale, but already proved not to work back in good old 1995. But what makes this movie so great are all the ways it doesn't work and still remains entertaining.

Based on a comic and thus subject to fantasy, the movie claims to be set in the year 1899, so we presume that's our 1899... yet there's submarines, machine guns, automobiles, rockets, etc., so any divide between Fantasy 1899 and Reality 1899 is never made clear. Not like the opening credits to Watchmen, where the movie's different world setting is much more evident. Now, a lot of people blame the movie's poor reception on the C.G.I. and it's overuse, but they might be surprised to discover the movie has a lot less of that than some would think. For example, I always thought Mr. Hyde was a C.G. character. Turns out it's just a bad-looking latex suit as seen below. And the car chase scene through Venice (with the first automobile ever created apparently) is actually all miniatures... Hmm. Interesting. Still looks like sh&^%, though.

Special effects aside, the main problem with LXG is the poor decisions on the creative teams' part. Coming out of The Matrix craze of all early-2000s superhero movies (X-Men and Norrington's Blade included), they chose to follow this visual trend of dark costuming and bullet-time action sequences to sway audiences into believing these story-lines. But for a movie set in the Victorian era, lifting the style of a movie about cyberpunks seems like an odd choice.

Now, maybe I am just ignorant, but I had no idea who Allan Quatermain was before seeing this movie. My inability to read anything beyond the back of a shampoo bottle didn't help. But the bigger question is, what audience going to see a superhero action movie would be brushing up on their Victorian era writings first? I knew Tom Sawyer (hardly Victorian and not as some f*&%ing secret service agent), Dr. Jekyll (the original Hulk), The Invisible Man (who spends most of the movie naked apparently), Captain Nemo (but only Disney's version), and Professor James Moriarty (with no Sherlock Holmes in sight).

Allan Quatermain? No idea. Mina Harker (Dracula's wife and former protagonist of the comic books) I only knew from Wyona Ryder's soulless portrayal in Bram Stoker's Dracula, where she wasn't a vampire and had me confused. And Dorian Gray (from The Picture of Dorian Gray, an Oscar Wilde story) was definitely the most obscure. Also, the movie provides no background to these characters, so if you don't know the story of Dorian Gray, Stuart Townsend's action movie one-liner seen in this clip really makes no sense...

LXG's legacy was less so informing audiences about these classical characters and more so about killing a lot of careers. After its release, Sean Connery quit acting all together. Director Stephen Norrington has not directed a feature since this. And this mess was the last film to carry Alan Moore's name. For all its infamy, though, this movie is immensely entertaining, from its over-the-top action sequences and general lunacy. You will be laughing out loud and have a great time with it.

BAD MOVIES THAT SHOULD BE SEEN (11 OF 100)

 

"Dracula 3000" (2004), Dir: Darrell Roodt
 

Nothing in Budget vs. Direct to Video

Back in my Blockbuster Video days, I was stuck working the Thanksgiving Day shift and going home to nobody. At the time, a co-worker of mine was from Sri Lanka and in the same boat, so rather than both spending our night by our lonesome, we decided to join forces and watch an array of bad movies instead. Of our three picks, each will be reviewed in this blog. There was Boa vs. Python, Waterworld, and the king of stink, Dracula 3000...

Oh, Dracula 3000. Completely unrelated to Dracula 2000, which has Star Trek Voyager's very own 7 of 9 getting staked in the boobs, Dracula 3000 is about a team of space aboard a craft called Mother III (Alien rip-off #1), a salvage ship that finds a derelict craft called Demeter. The crew of this ship is led by Captain van Helsing... Yeah, that's his name. Clever, huh? And better yet, played by Starship Trooper's own Aryan-bred Casper Van Dien. The film also stars Baywatch's Erika Eleniak (the not-so-hot one), Tom "Tiny" Lister (the president in The Fifth Element), and former rap sensation Coolio in a performance let's hope he's terribly ashamed of. We'll get back to that later.

So the crew finds the dead captain of the Demeter clutching a crucifix. During this discovery, their own ship Mother III decides to take matters into her own hands (Alien rip-off #2) and abandons the crew on the Demeter... without any explanation. It isn't long before Tiny and Coolio discover a cargo bay full of coffins. Thinking the coffins might have been used to smuggle drugs, Coolio opens one and is attacked by a vampire. Now under Count Orlock's control, an army of vampires intend to force the crew to bring the Demeter back to earth (Alien rip-off #3), and release a blood-sucking, vampire clusterf*&% (as if the earth's population couldn't possibly fight off 20 to 40 vampires).

Now, for all its terrible plottery, terrible actors, and a set that looks like the back of a grocery store (but turns out was a re-used set from the short-lived series Space Rangers), the biggest flaw of the film is Coolio. In mentioning my co-worker from Blockbuster at the beginning of this review, I wasn't just trying to highlight that I once had a friend, and that friend was a black-friend too, and a woman for that matter, but that her reaction to Coolio's performance was what put Dracula 3000 on this very list.

If you were around in the 1990s, you remember Coolio's 1995 hit song "Gangster's Paradise." For this socially-conscious tune, Coolio received the reputation of being a street philosopher and a positive role model for black youths. Flash-forward ten years to Dracula 3000 and Coolio is playing a pot-smoking cargo specialist named 187... Yep. 187. His interests are getting high and sexually harassing Erika Eleniak. When finding the corpse of the Demeter's dead captain, Coolio insists they search it for drugs. When Coolio turns into a vampire, instead of killing Erika, he goes on a rant describing in great detail how much he fantasized about, well, you might as well just watch the clip... And unfortunately, I cannot find the clip where Coolio chases Erika around the produce department -- I mean, ship, trying to run along the walls after her. Now, typically, when attempting something like that, a film production would employ special effects. But since this particular production didn't have any money, instead, what we get is Coolio trying to run along the walls himself, and for some reason making offensive monkey noises, leading to a speech where he actually refers to himself using the N-bomb. At that point, my co-worker screamed, "Holy sh*%! Coolio just sold-out his entire race!" And for the guy who used to speak out against negative black stereotypes, to do a complete 180 for Dracula F*&%ing 3000, I would agree.

As for the rest of the movie, once Dracula (or Count Orlock) actually enters, that's when everything just starts raising too many questions: Why was a cargo ship transporting coffins into space? If it's the year 3000, why is Dracula still dressed so Elizabethean? Did the vampires at some point learn how to navigate an interstellar spaceship? And if they did, why then do they need Capser, Tiny, or Coolio to do anything? Unfortunately, the only reason one really has to watch this film is if you wanna see Coolio make a fool of himself, and he does, dearly.

For your viewing displeasure, the title character Dracula gets one of his only scenes in the whole damn movie. Poor guy.