What are the worst rock and roll movies?

I thought that Val Kilmer did the best that he could with that awful script.
At least Stone didn't cast Will Smith to portray Arthur Lee!

 

I don't think this one's been mentioned... Todd Haynes' overwrought take on early 70s glam... 'Velvet Goldmine'.
I had such high expectations for this... my favourite period of music... so much potential... but it's unwatchable.

I should have read the poster... "Leave your expectations at the door."

Killer soundtrack, though.

I can't be objective about 'Phantom Of The Paradise'...
I live in a town where that movie is practically a religion... it's in our DNA.
We've had fan-fests, conventions with full cast reunions ("Phantompalooza")... it's kind of a thing.

 

Watching young speed freak Bob Dylan answer questions such as “what is the meaning of your music?” with retorts such “I don’t know, why don’t you tell me, what is ‘meaning’ anyway, man?” gets old for me pretty quick.

 

I watched this for the first time after finding the Blu-ray in a grocery store (!) dollar bin. I thought the same thing: wotta jerk this little pillhead is. On the other hand, the music is brilliant.

 

I never totally got into the nutty Rocky Horror thing, but I really love Phantom of the Paradise. That's a great film. I worked on the restoration team for Fox when we remastered the film for HD about 10 years ago, and that was a labor of love -- one of the rare occasions where I really looked forward to coming into work every day. Fantastic film.

 

I'm surprised to read that JLL liked Quaid's portrayal as well: I was always under the impression that he hated the whole thing... And yes, Quaid's portrayal leaves a lot to be desired: In spots he might as well have been playing Gomer Pyle rather than JLL...

"Great Balls of Fire" is not/was not the movie it could have/should have been... And the whole choreographed scene played to "High School Confidential" is totally ridiculous and laughable... The best part of the movie was the soundtrack, and thankfully they had Jerry Lee singing and playing the tunes, because Dennis Quaid wanted to do the music, which would have been horrible! (Listening to the duet of "Crazy Arms" on the soundtrack with JLL and Quaid is close to painful... Jerry's fine on it but Dennis, don't quit your day job...)

 

lol, good one.

 

Prince wasn't humbled too quickly, because he made a couple more after "Purple Rain"...

 

Can't say I agree with you on that one... Like I said above, in spots he might as well have been playing Gomer Pyle... I suppose he did as good with the role with what he was offered though.... I suppose seeing/knowing that the film lacked so much, I guess I just throw him under the bus along with the whole film, whether it's justified or not...

Jerry Lee doesn't refer to the film as "Great Balls of Sh**" for nothing... I remember a show on CBS back in the 80s (IIRC, it was called "West 57th Street") when the movie was going to come out and being promoted, and Jerry Lee said something like "This movie is great, it's fantastic, and it's true... They didn't leave anything out... This movie tells the truth, and sometimes the truth hurts"... What possessed him to say that is beyond me, unless he signed some sort of form with the producers saying he wouldn't publicly bash the film, because knowing what he really thought of the project certainly contradicts what he said on that show...

All that said, I don't totally *hate* the film-It's at least as "factual" as "The Buddy Holly Story"... I own(ed) it on DVD, but have no idea where it went off to, which may or may not be for the best...

 

I seen the Little Richard movie a grand total of one time, when it originally aired on TV... I remember thinking it was mediocre, not sure how I'd feel about it now... I do know if I ever seen the DVD of it at a thrift store, or in a bargain bin somewhere, I'd pick it up just to rewatch it again, if for no other reason than to see if it's what I remembered...

 

Sid & Nancy

 

I forgot about that, gotta agree.

 

I have no idea what any of the Bee Gees said after the movie/album bombed, but at the time, they made some very grandiose statements, such as this quote from Robin Gibb:

"There is no such thing as the Beatles now. They don't exist as a band and never performed Sgt Pepper live in any case. When ours comes out, it will be, in effect, as if theirs never existed."

That said, it's tough to trust any comments from the various musicians at any point. In 1978, they were going to praise it as part of the natural promotional process. Granted, Robin didn't have to go to the extreme he did, but it's natural that everyone will say it's great, awesome and amazing at that point.

Once the movie/album flopped, then you get the knee-jerk negative comments. No one wants to admit they made a stinker, so they find excuses and scapegoats.

If the Bee Gees later claimed they were roped into "Pepper's" and didn't want to do it, I'd be leery just because that sounds like a cop-out...

 

If YouTube had existed circa 1988, I would've been spared multiple viewings of that flick! My college apartment-mate coulda just watched that clip on his own and not forced the rest of us to watch the movie!

 

I'd viciously excoriate you for this, but we dog-avatar people gotta stick together!

 

In the real world, Cheap Trick would've made roughly 900 times more sense. Somehow it's more believable that the Soles character would have a massive crush on Robin Zander - not so much Joey Ramone.

That said, the use of Joey as the "heart-throb" gives the movie a spin that makes it more appealing. It's damned weird that Riff crushes on Joey, and that's kinda fun. It's definitely more memorable than the conventional "crush on hunky singer" element would've been.

And given how many ugly musicians have married hot women, I guess it's not WHOLLY unbelievable!

The Ramones fit the anarchic ending better than CT would've, too...

 

Yup. As I mention above, CT would've made the movie way more conventional. The use of the Ramones gives the movie a weird air that suits it...

 

Probably not - it did seem like a movie that should've been made like 7 years earlier - but it's certainly not a bad movie, much less one of the worst.

I've not seen it in years, but I really liked it as a 12-year-old in 1979 - I thought it was really effective. And topless Beverly D'Angelo helped, too!

 

1st it does not belong in this thread IMO. It was a decent movie.
2nd I think it was timely. There were a lot of movies around that time that were anti-war (as far as that goes). I was just graduating from high school and saw it in the theater.
Speaking of Hair - I just saw a stage production this fall. Nothing at all like the movie if you have never seen it (except the songs).

 

Films such as Jesus Christ Superstar and Godspell...does their awfulness count?

 

“Rockstar”

 

Velvet Goldmine is one of my favorite movies. Different strokes and all that...

 

It’s been odd to see Phantom of the Paradise and Streets of Fire lumped in with most of these others. Phantom was so much more than a cheesy camp-fest.

You had a great director early in a run that included Carrie, The Fury, Obsession, Dressed to Kill, and Blowout. Add a script that was a clever rock remake of Faust, a razor sharp commentary on the music business, a full blooded horror movie, a believable romance, and featured very funny performances by the principal actors.

Then you had Paul Williams, who was always much smarter and more cynical than the image portrayed by his most popular songs (if the Paul Williams is Still Alive documentary is available, it gives you a great glimpse at a forgotten genius) composing a set of wonderful homages to early rock and roll, hot rod music, glam rock accompanied by a couple of gorgeous ballads.

The cast was terrific, if largely unknown before and since (though Gerritt Graham had a decent career and Jessica Harper was very good in Stardust Memories and the criminally forgotten Pennies from Heaven) and the wonderful visuals were supervised by the great Jack Fisk (who went on to marry Sissy Spacek - who’s also credited behind the scenes in Phantom.., and direct another sadly forgotten drama Raggedy Man.)

Phantom was given a strong review from Pauline Kael and seems as fresh to me today as it did then. (Clearly others feel differently, which is the great thing about opinions - everybody gets to have one.)

Streets of Fire is a different story. Walter Hill was on a hot streak and this was supposed to be a major accomplishment (it cost a ton of money, if I recall correctly, as the whole thing was shot on an enormous sound stage built just for this movie.) but failed in almost every aspect (including the marketing. I remember hearing a radio ad on its opening weekend that offered free tickets to any girls who came dressed as Ellen Aim. The girl I was with looked at me and asked “Who the hell is Ellen Aim?”) It was too real to be a cartoon and too cartoon to be real.



Yet in many ways it was a movie in which the whole was less than the sum of its parts. Michael Pare’ was convincingly Eastwoodian (though a few years later I found myself checking out next to him at a New York hotel and staring down at him from my towering 5’ 9” ); Diane Lane was very sexy (even if the role required her to, as the saying goes, run the gamut of human emotion from A to B.); the fight scenes were great; Willem Defoe and Rick Moranis were good as always; and, if you have any tolerance for Jim Steinman, featured two of his greatest songs and productions.

So not great, but memorable, at the very least.

 

That is very cool... what a great project to work on. Did the director have any input on the restoration and remastering?

This is the version I have... it's dated 2001. Was there another one after that?
I believe there's a 2-disc release with the original 1974 artwork on the box (?).



Edit... I found this... it says HD 40th anniversary / restoration... but it also says "unofficial".

 

A two-disc 40th Anniversary version was issued in 2014. The movie itself was on a Blu-ray Disc, but surprisingly, the extras were all on a regular DVD.