So bad, it's good: Maximum Overdrive

in Netflix & Streaming3 years ago

I'll be getting to the winners of the 90's sci-fi contest soon so don't anyone worry about that. For the time being I want to talk about a film that deservedly was panned by critics across the board, has terrible scores on all the major review sites, and honestly, is a really terribly made film. However, it's so absurd and poorly made that this actually makes it a joy to watch for the kind of person that enjoys finding humor in things that weren't meant to be funny.

There are a lot of films out there like this, but Maximum Overdrive is truly ridiculous and this is precisely why I go back and watch it over and over again.


image.png
src

In 1986, and some would argue to this day, Stephen King could release a film about basically anything and people would go see it in theaters. He already had a string of massively successful films at this point including Carrie (his first), The Shining (rated by many people as one of the best films ever made), and Cat's Eye (panned by critics but a personal favorite of my own. When Maximum Overdrive came out, even though the previews seemed a bit silly, everyone was excited to go see it.


src

Combine all the above factors with the fact that Emilio Estevez was in what can be considered the high-point of his career and the public didn't have any reason to suspect that this movie was going to absolutely suck.

Many people attribute the suckiness of this movie to the fact that Stephen King himself wrote the screenplay and directed the film despite having little to no experience in the trade. What can you say? Some people just think because they are good at one thing that they are going to be good at everything. It would be the only full-length film that King would ever direct.

If you are unfamiliar with this movie it kind of takes Terminator to another level. Not only do some machines become cognitively aware of their existence and rise up to eliminate their slave master humans, but ALL machines do so. This can be anything from a computer to a car or even a hair dryer. Their only desire in their new-found sentience is to kill all humans.


image.png
src
lawn mowers have had enough of their slavery

There are also a lot of elements of the film that fail to establish continuity such as the fact that a couple who are in a machine, their own car, are attempting to outrun other vehicles that are trying to kill them. There isn't any explanation as to why their own car doesn't just kill them.


image.png
src

While holed up in a gas station, some of the machines decide to team up and infiltrate the compound. A bulldozer and a military vehicle with a mounted machine gun come by and through morse code - because obviously the military vehicle knows Morse code - demand that the humans come out and fill up their diesel fuel tanks if they wish to escape with their lives.

I'm not going to spoil any more than I already have but the humans are plotting how they can double-cross the machines. Someone in the group who just happens to know Morse code also informs the group about a nearby island where no motorized vehicles are allowed because: reasons. It's completely stupid but the plot needed to move forward I guess.

The sequence of events that happens was the 1986 warning of sorts to tell the world that we have become too dependent upon technology. I can only imagine what they would say about the lives of today where basically nobody knows how to do anything without the help of a smart phone.

Even that trailer is more of an episode of Stephen King talking about how great Stephen King is and just that is cringe enough to get me to watch this movie again. The humorous thing about this is that King struggles with his lines just in this 2- minute video and they had an unlimited amount of takes to get it right. Not only does he suck as a screenwriter and director, but dude can't act worth a damn either.

Should I watch it?

If you appreciate bad cinema that is so bad it is good then I say yes. There is no reason at all to watch this film based on any other reason that to poke fun of just how blisteringly awful it is. The horror isn't scary, the lines are corny, the lack of continuity just goes on and on, and the ending is a non-ending of ultimate convenience that the actions of the characters in the film have zero impact on whatsoever.

It is truly a terrible film. Some would say one of the worst bigger budget films of all time. It lost money at cinemas but has since become a cult classic for all the wrong reasons. I've seen this movie dozens of times and I go back every now and then just to marvel at the awfulness of it all. I think it was only Stephen King's own ego and probably a fair bit of his own money that resulted in this thing ever being in theaters in the first place.


50119633_m.jpg
For the right person

Sort:  

Dude, at times you almost sound like you have an axe to grind with King lol Stephen King himself called it "a moron movie" - source:

In that same video interview he also admits that he didn't know a lot of things, basically learning on the go; and that he was terrified to direct his first feature.
It was made under the influence (I don't know if he himself ever admitted to that, but some people of the crew and cast had made comments about that publicly), which probably explains why I have always found it to be fun to watch. I mean, if you create something under the influence, it is impossible to really hide that. Moreover, the screenplay was basically an extended version of his short story Trucks, included in Night Shift. I don't know if you've read Night Shift, but a lot of stuff in that is dopey fun, and you kinda need to watch the film through those dopey lens, imo. So when you say it wasn't meant to be funny, that isn't really true.

Regarding The Shining - King hated Kubrick's film for a long time. (I remember reading some of the commentary regarding it in his book Danse Macabre.) So it's not that he had a control over how his works were adapted before he went on to write and direct a film based on his literary work. But even when he was in director's chair for the first time, he had to deal with some decisions of De Laurentis that weren't in line with his vision of what should or shouldn't be in the movie. (For one, he wanted Bruce Springsteen to star in it.)

I have seen, in my opinion, a lot of bad films, but when someone asks me to name a bad film, Maximum Overdrive is not something that would come to mind.

what a wonderful response and thanks for that information. I did not know most of that. I would have loved to have seen Bruce Springsteen in that starring role.

I have no beef with King, I have read a lot of his books and as a teenager these books were the only times I can recall the written word actually giving me nightmares. He is a legend, that is for sure.

I love King's short stories. Can't say that was a literature I'd have grown up with, but it is always inspiring because of some absurd events taking place; impossible becomes possible and terrifying, dangerous, and doesn't last too long. One other aspect of King's works that I admire is how profoundly the human characters had been created (this isn't so much about short stories as much it's about novels); particularly their background: profession, state they'd been born in and struggles they have had to deal with - in my opinion King has always made a formidable and fierce competition to other horror writers at that level.

I think a sequel to Maximum Overdrive with Stephen King directing again, and Bruce Springsteen cast as a dad and grandad wouldn't be a bad idea. There's so much technology these days that wasn't there back in 1980s, and if you get some good screenwriters who can articulate the differences and turn today's world around us into a proper menace (smth similar to that what they did with Child's Play reboot), it could end up being something memorable, imo. These days, as opposed to 1980s, cars and trucks have got computers inside them so that alone makes a promising starting point imo. Though I suppose there should be a notable difference from the usual tech noir narrative - no AI of any sort. Aliens maybe, but no AI; otherwise it instantly falls into computer against human category, which is what original Maximum Overdrive seemed to be mocking. But then again - it could be played out as a satire of the usual tech noir standard turning it into a comedy rather than serious sci fi action film.
Just thought I'd leave some ideas here.

I think a sequel to Maximum Overdrive with Stephen King directing again, and Bruce Springsteen cast as a dad and grandad wouldn't be a bad idea

wow, what an idea that would be. With all the drivel that Hollywood is coming out with these days I think the public deserves this. I would absolutely love to see that happen.

And I thought 2021 movies are terrible, but this one far surpassed it.

I missed this one, so I have to add this one to the list for next weekend. Looks like today it would be viewed as cringe.

That's like good.. thanks

That's look very giod..

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.25
TRX 0.20
JST 0.035
BTC 95947.49
ETH 3420.95
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.40