Oh the humanity!!

So I'm sitting at work, casually browsing the web for news, funny stories, etc when I stumble upon a story that makes me sick to my stomach. "Paris as Mother Teresa?" WTF?! No seriously, WTF?!

It never ceases to amaze me how repeatedly stupid movie executives really are. I can see it now, the director is in the producers' office on the nth floor of their Hollywood skyscraper in downtown L.A. He's pitching his idea for a movie...

"And we could have Paris Hilton play Mother Teresa! She'd be great! Not only is she ridiculously blonde, but she will have no problem being celibate during shoots since she'll be out making porno at night to be distributed on the web!"

There's no end. Every year we are subjected to the idiocy of movie executives. I swear to god they probably sit around in their cushy offices trying to devise ways of making the most idiotic, mind-numbing movies out there. Or better yet, they continuously allow terrible directors to continue directing. Uwe Boll, for example, is the epitome of bad directing. His latest flick, BloodRayne, based on the game of the same name, is a horrendous attempt to translate an action-packed video game to the big screen. You should note that it scored a pitiful 5% on the tomatometer on RottenTomatoes.com. This is on the heels of Uwe Boll's other movie disasters like Alone in the Dark (1% on the tomato-meter) and House of the Dead (6% on the tomato-meter). When critics and audiences alike both hate (and I stress the word "hate") a director's movies, why do producers insist on releasing them anyways? I'm sure that the executives are holding out in the hopes that he might maybe produce something good, but c'mon! When 2 out of 3 bomb, you cut 'em loose! Buh bye! Adios! Sayonnara! In my honest opinion, Uwe Boll should be permanently banned from using a camera of any kind to spare us the pain.

The latest in movie executives' blunders: disallowing advance screenings of films they know critics will hate. Their justification for this is as follows: even though critics will almost certainly bash the movie, audiences will go anyways because these are the types of films that draw people who don't even bother with reviews. That sounds logical, but if that's the case, then what the fuck are you guys doing producing movies that will elicit this kind of response in the first place?! Seriously, movie producers are really a bunch of dumb fucks hoping for a good movie now and then.

What's funny is that they actually expect that. They honestly expect that only a couple in several movies will do well at the box office. Isn't that sad?! It's sad. Very very sad indeed. Hell, some studios even told Pixar that they had to stop producing consistently good movies because it was ruining their "pattern". Pixar, which spawned Finding Nemo (98% on the tomato-meter) and The Incredibles (97% on the tomato-meter), was coming out with excellent movies each and every time. They were fresh, original, and cool.

This is not to say that almost all movies made are trash-worthy. Quite a few are actually engaging. Take this previous Oscar-season as an example. Movies like Brokeback Mountain, Crash, Capote, and Munich all exemplified the essence of true film-making. If there's a message in here, it's that studio executives really need to pay attention to what they're paying for. They really need to start learnin' the difference of what is worth seeing and what is worthless.