Sunday, October 25, 2026

Evil Bong 777 (2018) and the Evolution of the Evil Bong Franchise


I was a year into writing the Sunday “Bad” Movies posts when I looked at my collection and settled on a movie that would change my life forever. It was in one of those bargain bin sort of compilation DVDs where they take ten mostly unknown movies and toss them into a cheap set. Well, nine mostly unknown movies if it’s a horror set. The tenth is always Night of the Living Dead. I’d been eyeing this movie up since I first got my hands on the set. The name sounded so ridiculous that I had to check it out. Evil Bong. And so it began.

Watching that first Evil Bong movie was the start of a new era for me. It opened me up to a realm of movies I hadn’t known about to that point. It was directed by Charles Band, the founder of Full Moon Features. I started dipping into that studio’s movies. The Gingerdead Man franchise. The Puppet Master franchise. Robot Wars. Then I went back further in Charles Band’s career, because Full Moon wasn’t his first production company. In the early 1980s, he had Empire Pictures. What did I then watch from that company? Well, Robot Jox, but I saw that before I knew Charles Band. But I plan on covering a few more of the movies from the earlier company.

I’m not here to write about Charles Band, though. I just thought it might be worth the time to give you context about how deep I’ve gone into the Charles Band-iverse. The pinnacle of which has been the Evil Bong franchise. It has acted as a sort of Sacred Timeline to Full Moon Features. Many of the franchises and characters that have existed within the company have made their way into the series. That was true from the very beginning. The Bong World within the first Evil Bong featured cameos by Ivan Burroughs (from the Decadent Evil series), Jack Deth (from the Trancers series), The Gingerdead Man (from the Gingerdead Man movies), and Ooga Booga (from Doll Graveyard). It was like the Bong World was the thread in which every Full Moon Features franchise was tied.


Now I’m seven (technically eight because of the crossover) movies deep into the Evil Bong series. Evil Bong 777 saw Rabbit (Sonny Carl Davis), Faux Batty Boop (Robin Sydney), Misty (Jessica Morris), and Ebee (Michelle Mais) flee to Las Vegas after escaping Sexy Hell. They wanted to stay away from Lucy Furr (Mindy Robinson), who wanted revenge for the events of Evil Bong 666.

The story of Evil Bong 777 was a far cry from where the franchise began. What I want to explore is that evolution of the series. I want to let you, whatever readers I still have in a day and age where attention spans are minimal, know the journey of the franchise and not just the destination. I also want to help myself understand how we got here. Mostly, I want to help myself understand how things went from stoner comedies to… Whatever the hell you would classify Evil Bong 777 as.

Let’s go back a few years. For me, the year was 2013. For the Evil Bong franchise, it was 2006. Those were the years when I first watched Evil Bong and when Evil Bong was first released, respectively. That first movie would be the one that changed Charles Band’s Full Moon Features forever. It was the one that connected so many of his franchises. It would continue connecting them as more movies came out. It was stoner comedy horror where the stoners took hits from a bong and their spirits transported into the bong to be killed by the bong. There just happened to be cameos galore from other Full Moon Features characters who had their spirits trapped in the bong world.

There wasn’t anything all that crazy about the first movie. The premise was made clear early on. There was a real world and a bong world. The stoners were a group of friends and roommates who were saved by the nerd who just moved in and the previous owner of the bong. There were girlfriends and ex-girlfriends and delivery men and grandpas, but the core of the story was that Ebee, the evil bong, was trying to kill the stoners.


The two sequels that followed didn’t stray too far from that premise. Evil Bong 2: King Bong saw the stoners head to the jungle, where they came upon a bong that was eviller than Ebee. It was trying to do the same sort of killing method, only it took whole people into the Bong World instead of just their spirits. There was the added wrinkle of the stoners having side effects to what happened in the first movie, including increased appetites for sleep, sex, and food. Rabbit, the delivery guy who had a bit role in the first movie, tagged along to the jungle with them. In the bong world, the villainous Poontang Tribe tried to roll him into a joint and smoke him.

The first sequel to Evil Bong slowly began the transition of the franchise from its stoner comedy/horror roots to going full… Well, you’ll understand the further I go. Things get way more sexual than the sexual place the movies started. In the first movie, the Bong World was a strip club where the strippers killed the spirits of the victims. Yeah, that’s some sex movie making right off the bat. Evil Bong 2: King Bong, however, made the half-naked to naked henchwomen much more eye candy than a threat. Sure, they tried to roll Rabbit up. I already mentioned that. But they also spent more time standing around, looking pretty. Or naked.

Evil Bong 3D: The Wrath of Bong brought in a bong from outer space to threaten the stoners. It was more of the same. The same stoners, the same idea of being transported to a bong world. All that sort of stuff. The biggest difference was that the new Space Bong had an alien fungus that grew alien weed on anyone it came into physical contact with. There were naked women in this one too, found inside the Bong World.


The point we’re at now in the Evil Bong franchise is where I would put the delineation between a stoner comedy with some sex comedy moments and start the real transition into sex comedies that just happened to feature stoner jokes. As you can see from my brief descriptions, the original trilogy of Evil Bong flicks was about a group of stoner friends who fought off a trio of evil bongs. They ended up in places that had naked women, but the stories were focused primarily on weed. They were addicted to smoking and toking. The weed caused them to, in the case of the second film, have physical and mental ailments and, in the case of the third film, be covered in parasitic alien buds. The weed was always what the stories came back to, even with the strip club of the Bong World or the half-naked armies of henchwomen.

The original trilogy of Evil Bong movies included crossovers to other Full Moon Features franchises. However, the next movie was a full-on crossover that would change the trajectory of the series. Gingerdead Man vs. Evil Bong officially merged two of the Full Moon Features franchises. Larnell, Rabbit, and Velicity returned from the Evil Bong movies. Sarah Leigh, the main character from The Gingerdead Man, was also around. They had to work together to stop Gingerdead Man, who was out for revenge because Sarah Leigh survived his original rampage.

Most of this movie was spent recapping what happened in the previous movies of each series. It was a clip show of sorts, with only bits and pieces of a new story thrown in. I don’t remember how much nudity there was in the movie, but I can tell you that Larnell owned Dick’s Head Shop, which should have told me where things were going with these movies. Oh, and The Gingerdead Man was here to stay. He would be featured in almost all the Evil Bong movies going forward. Not that he hadn’t already been in the first Evil Bong. But he would be a main character now.


Here we are, at the new era of Evil Bong movies. Evil Bong 420 was the first post-crossover movie, and it set the tone for the descent into madness that would be the remainder of the franchise. Rabbit was now the main character. Yes, the delivery guy from the first movie was elevated to main character status. Three of the four stoners from the original trilogy were completely out of the franchise. Rabbit opened a bowling alley. Not just any bowling alley. Rabbit opened a topless bowling alley. The setting of the entire movie was an excuse to show topless women. The focus of the movie had shifted from weed (which was still present, mind you) to boobs. And penises. The Bong World of Evil Bong 420 was a CGI creation and featured phallic looking scenery.

The biggest indicator of the shift to sex comedy within Evil Bong 420, however, was a sex scene set within the bowling alley. I don’t remember any of the Evil Bong movies before this fourth one having a full sex scene within them. This one featured one of the bowling alley employees getting freaky with The Gingerdead Man. As the evil little pastry reached climax, icing shot up to coat the lucky lady’s face. It was clearly a comedic sex scene, but the fact that it was in the movie showed that the focus had moved from weed to sex. Charles Band’s perverted side was coming out more than it had in the past.

I should also mention that more and more porn stars showed up in the Evil Bong movies as they went on. The first movie did have at least one porn star featured as a stripper within the Bong World. The second movie featured a few as the Poontang Tribe, and the third… I don’t know if the third featured any. Evil Bong 420, though… They were getting parts that weren’t just the naked henchwomen for a villain. Two porn stars showed up as themselves at the bowling alley, and a couple more played the henchwomen. This was also the movie that introduced Mindy Robinson into the series, an actress not afraid to show off her butt and boobs in whatever movies she’s in. She’s not a great person, mind you, but she did show off a lot of skin back in the 2010s. Before the MAGA, being at the storming of the capital, anti-vaxxer, conspiracy theorist stuff became her whole personality.


Evil Bong: High 5! was the Evil Bong movie I remembered the least about. I definitely watched it. Looking up the story, I remember that storyline. Do I remember anything specific that happened in it? Not at all. Most of the characters from the previous movie appeared again, including Mindy Robinson, who took off her top. There were porn stars as henchwomen again. Same old same old. There’s not much to take away from that one. Legitimately, I cannot remember a thing about it.

Things got weirder and more sexual in Evil Bong 666. Mindy Robinson was kind of the main character of this one as Lucy Furr, the new owner of a dispensary. She managed to get Ebee and use her as a way to do something with Sexy Hell. Yeah, Hell couldn’t just be Hell. In the world of the later Evil Bong movies, it had to be Sexy Hell, where the devil surrounded himself with naked women. Now this, this movie right here, the one I’m currently writing about, was where the movies became a full-fledged sex comedy that just happened to be set in the world of weed. Okay, Evil Bong 420 was kind of that too, but this one was egregious.

I don’t remember a sex scene in Evil Bong 666, but I do remember the crazy amount of nudity. The demons in Sexy Hell were always topless. Mindy Robinson was flaunting. The only things that really kept it within the realm of stoner comedy were Lucy Furr owning a dispensary, and the creation of The Gingerweed Man. Larnell wasn’t even there, and he was the only one of the stoner friends from the original trilogy that had lasted beyond those three movies. This was a fully changed franchise.


That change would continue with Evil Bong 777, which was the least stoner movie of the entire franchise. There wasn’t much of a story to latch onto in Evil Bong 777. They went to Vegas, they stopped at a show, they went to a hotel, and they hid out at a museum. There was barely a conflict. They were running the whole time. The entire confrontation between the good guys and the bad guys was about ten seconds and didn’t put anyone in harm’s way. It felt like the entire movie was made because they liked the idea of 777 being Las Vegas, rather than to tell a compelling story. Not that story has been much of a thought post-crossover.

The only real references to weed that were left in Evil Bong 777 were things that didn’t help shape the story at all. The Gingerweed Man was there. He was on the run with the characters. His absence wouldn’t have really changed anything. They could have swapped him out for The Gingerdead Man and the story would have stayed the exact same. It wasn’t like they smoked him or he smoked anything. He was just kind of there. The same with Ebee. The other reference was that the characters called a rideshare service to pick them up. Instead of being called Lyft, it was called Splyft, and the driver provided customers with weed. That was it.

Most of the screentime for Evil Bong 777 was devoted to being a sex comedy, showing how far the movies had swung into that new genre. One of the first things the characters did upon arriving to Las Vegas, after the obligatory drive down the strip, was go to a performance. That performance involved a porn star having a full-on sex show with a life-sized puppet Elvis, nicknamed Hellvis. This was an extended scene of the porn star grinding up against Hellvis before being penetrated with his big, studded dildo penis until she reached climax. The comedy came from the puppet. The sex came from the… well, the sex. It was like a comedic softcore scene in the middle of a movie from a franchise that started out as a stoner horror comedy.

Then there was the whole middle portion of the movie where the characters were hooking up, or at least trying to. Faux Batty Boop and The Gingerweed Man shared a hotel room and were doing all the things to lead up to foreplay and sex. When Faux Batty Boop went into the washroom, The Gingerweed Man called up a call girl. They proceeded to get caught in the act when Faux Batty Boop returned. Then there was Rabbit, who met a woman down in the hotel bar. He invited her back to his room and things started to get hot and heavy. Then, in the most insensitive scene of this movie that came out in the year of our lord, 2018, Rabbit fled his own hotel room upon learning that she was a transwoman who had a penis.

Finally, there were still the scenes of Sexy Hell, where the devil had his topless women sidekicks. Lucy Furr was there trying to find a way to escape and get to the crew in Las Vegas for revenge. Those things were par for the course, at this point. They didn’t up the ante into sex comedy in the same ways as the other parts of Evil Bong 777 that I mentioned.


This has been a thirteen-year journey to get me to this point. I watched Evil Bong all the way back in 2013, the early days of Sunday “Bad” Movies. The name piqued my interest. A movie about an evil bong sounded like the right kind of movie for the blog. I was correct in that thought. It led me into some interesting places. It gave me a whole series of sometimes interesting movies to write about. It opened me up to all the movies in the Full Moon catalogue, really. I wouldn’t be sitting here right now, writing about Evil Bong 777, after thirteen years of this blog, without having taken a chance to watch that first Evil Bong movie so long ago.

Over those thirteen years, I ventured through a series of movies that slowly but surely shifted from beginning as a stoner comedy with horror and sex elements to a sex comedy with horror and stoner elements. I went on a side quest through The Gingerdead Man and its sequels. I learned, while writing this post, that I should probably go through the Killjoy movies. Not just because Faux Batty Boop was inspired by those movies, but because characters from the Evil Bong movies appeared in one of the Killjoy movies. It has been a wild ride that isn’t quite done yet.

I know this wasn’t necessarily the best post I’ve written. That’s fine. Writing this one was much more for myself than anyone reading this. I needed to come to terms with how and when this franchise transitioned into being so obsessed with sex and nudity. I needed to type it out to sort of accept that this sort of stuff had always been there. It simply became more prominent as the franchise went on. This was me exorcising my demons after watching a movie and wondering where it even came from. Now I know. And knowing is half the battle.


What you’re going to know now are these notes:

Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, October 4, 2026

Office Romance (2026)


Every year, people seem to act like there’s a new worst movie ever made. Something that was an affront on their senses. Something that never should have been made because of how downright awful it was. Many times, that’s an unfair claim. They saw something they didn’t like and instantly called it the worst because they didn’t like it.

I want to take this post to break down different reasons that people have for exaggerating how bad they think something is. Now, this is coming from a place of my own opinion. Of course it is. And the claims that people make about what might be one of the worst movies they have ever seen are also their opinion. The thing is, there are so many variables to why someone could feel a certain way about something. There are so many experiences that can lead to them thinking a specific thing. Those influences and variables for sure affect what they think. They can lead to things being treated as worse than they truly are.

One of the bigger examples this year of people claiming a movie to be one of the worst was the release of Office Romance. Yes, this is going to be a sort of in defence of Office Romance post. Don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t anything special. The movie was fine. But it was far from the worst and I want to break down things that I think may have steered people into thinking the movie was worse than what it probably was.

For those who don’t know, Office Romance was a romantic comedy about Jackie Cruz (Jennifer Lopez), the CEO of an airline. She fell in love with her new in-house lawyer, Daniel Blanchflower (Brett Goldstein). Their whirlwind romance was against company policy, so they tried to keep it a secret. As time went on, however, that became tough to do.

Office Romance was a movie that got a lot of hate almost as soon as it came out. I think that I can point to two reasons that hate came about. Each reason involved a bias that people had as they headed into it. One was the most basic of reasons. Audiences, particularly the people who want to be taken seriously as a voice within the film-fan sphere, like to treat Netflix as a less-than movie outlet. The second reason was that people had preconceived notions of Brett Goldstein based on their love of his work in Ted Lasso and Shrinking. Those two elements fed into their expectations for Office Romance. The movie had no chance.


Let me start with the Netflix of it all. This might take a while. There are a few things that need to be unpacked when it comes to the streaming giant. They might not all seem related at first, but as I go on with my ranting and rambling, you should come to understand what I’m getting at. I sometimes overexplain myself to the point of there being no possible way for anyone reading to misunderstand what I’m saying. That will likely be what happens here because there are a lot of little bits and pieces of Netflix information that must come together to create the whole picture.

Netflix began as a DVD rental service in 1998. The idea was that people could subscribe and get DVD rentals mailed to them. Did someone want to watch Finding Nemo? Netflix would ship it to them. When they were done watching, they could ship it right back. That was the entire model, a model that companies like Blockbuster and Redbox also used. Redbox did it a little differently, though, with vending machines at grocery stores and post offices and places like that.

By 2007, streaming video had become a mainstay on the internet. YouTube was around, and other video services had been available prior to that. Netflix decided to get into the streaming video game. Not only would they mail DVDs, but people could log into their website and watch movies directly through their streamed videos. They soon went international, spreading their streaming services worldwide.

House of Cards dropped in 2013, marking Netflix’s first foray into original content. Well, their first solo foray. Lilyhammer, a co-production with a Norwegian network had shown up a year earlier. This would pave the way for many more original movies and television shows that would come in the years following. Some of them were nominated for awards. House of Cards, Orange is the New Black, Mindhunter, and Stranger Things were nominated for Emmy awards, with a few wins tossed in there. Roma, The Power of the Dog, and Emilia Perez were nominated for, and in some cases won, Oscars. They made some well-respected original programming.

All the while, there were people hating on the Netflix model. These award-nominated and award-winning projects were the outliers to these people. It was easy to see why. There seemed to be a different way of producing the projects that weren’t meant to strive for awards. The popcorn products. The stuff that would become known as content, rather than movies or television. Even though Netflix was still producing some respectable things, people were getting bogged down in the stuff they didn’t like.


Early on in Netflix’s foray into original programming, it became apparent that the company was using user data to determine what movies and tv shows they should make. Let’s go back to House of Cards for a moment. Netflix had years of data up to that point of what people were watching. They liked political thrillers, including the British show that House of Cards was adapted from. When they watched David Fincher movies, they usually watched them the whole way through. A popular actor (remember this was before the whole sexual abuse stuff came to light) was Kevin Spacey. Netflix took these three pieces of data they collected and put them together. They made a political thriller starring Kevin Spacey that was produced by David Fincher, who would direct a couple episodes. That data led to a big hit. Netflix struck gold.

They continued their data driven productions by bringing Happy Madison into the fold. You see, Adam Sandler movies were some of the most rewatched content on Netflix. He was one of the biggest box office draws. If they could bring him and his production company into their streaming service, exclusively, they could draw big numbers. They did both. Adam Sandler signed a contract to produce four movies for the company, starting in 2014. He has since extended that contract multiple times.

It’s easy to see why people might dislike Netflix for this kind of production model. It feels like they don’t care about the artistry of movies. There was no real focus on the story. They simply thought of movies and television as interchangeable pieces. Take the pieces from one thing. Put them with the pieces of another thing. Now you have a new thing that feels close enough to the old thing that the same people who liked the old thing will like the new thing. Take a look at their true crime documentaries. They’ve been using the same formula for a long time, to the point that the formula became a trend on TikTok this year.

I don’t entirely stand by this line of thinking when it comes to Netflix. Sure, they’re definitely using our watching habits to determine what gets made and who stars in it. But so do the major Hollywood studios. They just don’t use the same data-driven technology to make those decisions. Studios go by box office when they try to figure out the who, the what, and the why of their movies. Die Hard was popular, so they made Die Hard clones with any budding star. Steven Seagal in Under Siege. Keanu Reeves in Speed. Skyscraper with Anna Nicole Smith. When the Marvel Cinematic Universe hit it big, Warner Brothers tried to do the same thing with DC properties. They’re still trying, but with a reboot. Universal tried to do the Dark Universe. All studios are built on finding trends and finding popular stars and beating that dead horse until the person beating it has died of old age.


Moving on from the data-driven side of the Netflix argument, it’s time to talk about the look of their movies. Somewhere over the past fifteen or twenty years, lighting in movies has greatly changed. Many people attribute that to Netflix. There’s a certain look that they call the Netflix look. Bright light, soft contrast. That’s it. Everyone’s faces must be bright and there must be light on all sides. That lack of care in the lighting has led to people considering it the Netflix look. And it’s hard to argue with it. But that’s also the way that most movies have gone, recently. Television, too. The lighting used to help tell the story. Now it simply illuminates everything, to the detriment of the visual aesthetic.

I don’t one hundred percent believe that this look was Netflix’s fault. Sure, they kind of perfected it and stood out for the way they used it so constantly in their projects. I want to take you back a few years before Netflix got into original content, though. Let’s go back to 2006, the year that YouTube was made public on the world wide web. You see, from the beginning, there were a few types of videos that would show up on YouTube. There was comedy, whether that be sketch or standup. There were home videos. There were copyright-infringement clips from movies and TV. Then there were the people who wanted to talk into the camera and see if anyone out there was listening to them.

It was these people, the commentary community, that I think ruined lighting for the rest of us. The reaction people, the tutorial people, the review people. People who hadn’t been versed in the way of filmmaking and had simply sat down at their computer with a camera and started talking. Something that became popular in this community was the ring light. They would place it around their camera, and it would provide a uniform lighting across their face.

What does this have to do with Netflix? Ring lights first started getting popular on YouTube in the early 2010s within the beauty subsect of the commentary community. Light everywhere on the face made the makeup easier to see for tutorials and that sort of thing. It soon started to take off within the rest of the community before reaching worldwide popularity during the Covid lockdowns. People on Zoom meetings needed light and ring lights were a good option. This impacted movies and television in two major ways. One, a generation was growing up on seeing things lit that way and it became normalized for them. Two, the studios saw that ring lights were popular and that people were gladly watching things lit by ring lights, then decided to emulate that visual.

So, yeah, Netflix’s data-driven model for making movies struck again. Especially during the Covid era. They saw that people were consuming content that had that style of lighting. It was an acceptable style. They used that style and people kept watching. They kept using that style. It was a feedback loop. When there’s enough saturation of that style of lighting on their streaming platform, and people watch things with that style of lighting because there are so many things lit that way, they’ll make more because they’re being watched. It’s like with clothing. If there’s only a yellow option for a rain jacket, it will be the most popular option because it’s the only option. If there were equal amounts of yellow and black produced, the data would probably show that the black was more popular. The ring lighting emulation remained more popular because there was more of it available on Netflix, not because it was actually the preferred visual style.


Enough rambling about that part, though. I still have one other thing about people hating Netflix that I need to get to. That is the way they market their projects. Netflix has produced so many things over the thirteen years since House of Cards that there’s no way anyone could know or see all of them. The problem is that Netflix only really puts effort into promoting a handful of projects a year. The rest of them get thrown up on the streamer without any effort put into a marketing push. There have been shows that made it to three or four seasons on Netflix that I’d never heard of before that. I know that’s an anecdote, but I think it’s a fair one to put in there. The one that comes to mind is On My Block. I had never heard of that until the third season premiered. Netflix just never promoted it.

This could also bleed into the idea that Netflix cancels their shows too early. There have been numerous good television shows on Netflix that got cancelled after a season or two due to low viewership. In many cases, Netflix hadn’t promoted those shows, so the shows had no chance of getting off the ground. I think back to Everything Sucks!, a coming-of-age story that got a single season, though it received mostly positive reviews. It never really got the marketing push it deserved, since it came out the same month as Altered Carbon, the reboot of Queer Eye, and The Joel McHale Show with Joel McHale, all of which I remember getting the promotion at the time. It essentially got buried on Netflix, which is the problem with Netflix making so much content.

Let’s put all of this together now. The Netflix half of the hate that gets thrown onto Office Romance. People didn’t hate Office Romance. They hated what it stood for. They had preconceived notions of Netflix doing some bad things. Netflix was at the forefront of using data to make their movies, which disgusted people in a way. Netflix pushed the idea of lighting looking very muted, uniform, and bland. Netflix would promote movies and television shows that fit within their idea of what people wanted, based on data, and bury their better content under the other millions of movies and shows they released. It wasn’t that people truly hated Office Romance. It’s that it embodied what they hated about Netflix and their rage bubbled to the surface when they watched it.

So that’s the first part of why I think Office Romance got more hate than it deserved. It wasn’t so much the quality of the movie, as it was the Netflix of it all. People are getting tired of what Netflix stands for. They’re getting tired of the poor quality of the popular Netflix projects. Yet, Hallmark could have put out this movie exactly as it was and people would eat it up. That’s why I think it was a Netflix problem.


Okay, not entirely a Netflix problem. I still need to get to the Brett Goldstein portion of this post. Yeah, it feels like I’ve already written an entire post. There’s a little more to go before I can wrap it up. Actually, there’s a lot to go. I have to go over why Brett Goldstein’s inclusion caused people to dislike Office Romance, and then I need to get into Office Romance, itself, just to tie everything together. I hope you’ve got a snack and a drink because we’re about to dive right back in.

To fully understand the popularity of Brett Goldstein, you need to go back a few years. You need to go back to… Covid. Yeah, we’re going back to the era of our lives where lockdowns happened. That time in our lives when we were all depressed. We were all sad that we had to be separated from our friends, family, and found family. Some of us grew apart. Some of us passed away. It was, as every single corporation shilling out their products online or on TV said, unprecedented times.

There wasn’t much to grasp onto when we were in lockdown mode. We couldn’t go out to the places we wanted. Movies and television shut down production. A few things trickled out here and there, but we all had other things on our minds. Of course, some of the streaming services hit it big. Tiger King hit right when “the world shut down.” On March 11th, 2020, the NBA shut down due to a Covid outbreak. Most leagues and businesses followed suit. Within two weeks, much of North America would shut down, though many US states reopened quickly after that. People were cut off. That caused that depression and sadness.

Fast forward five months. It’s now August 2020. Apple TV+ premiered a new show starring Jason Sudeikis. It was about an American football coach plucked from his home state of Kansas and placed in the coaching position for an English Premier League team. The owner wanted the team to fail and hired him solely because she thought he wouldn’t be able to hack it. However, his positivity and ability to get the team to open up to their emotions brought the success nobody expected.

Ted Lasso hit at the perfect time. When the world was in such a downer place, it was a beacon of positivity. The main character told his team to believe. The show told the world to believe. The main character was about curiosity, not judgement. The show instilled those ideas into their viewers. Ted Lasso was a show about empathy in a time when people had turned a worldwide pandemic into a political fighting point. It did whatever it could to try and bring people back together, no matter how much they begrudgingly tried to stay apart.

A major part of Ted Lasso’s success was the stellar performances. One that stood out for many and became a quick fan favourite was Brett Goldstein’s performance as Roy Kent, the surly, grumpy, veteran captain of Richmond FC, the main team. He was one of the toughest members of the team to turn to Ted’s style of coaching, but he eventually came around. His rough exterior had a softness on the inside, and people latched onto the character.

I don’t need to go too far in depth to help you understand that Brett Goldstein was a major player in getting people out of their Covid funk. Ted Lasso, the show, was a light in the darkness of 2020. People watched it to feel better about life. When they turned it on, they saw Brett Goldstein’s mug staring back at them. Or, I guess, slightly off to the side of them, since actors try not to stare right down the barrel of the camera unless they’re breaking the fourth wall. There was nostalgia in the show and seeing him brought that nostalgia back, as well.


But it wasn’t simply his performance that elevated him. If it were, then I could be writing about a Hannah Waddingham movie the same way I’m going to be writing about Office Romance by the end of this post. There was more to Brett Goldstein’s involvement in Ted Lasso than his performance. There was more that made people love him and put him on a pedestal. The other element was that he wrote for the show. I don’t mean that he improvised his lines and they gave him a writing credit. I’m sure he improvised some of his lines. However, he was an official writer for the show. He was part of the writer’s room. He was hired as one of the writers before he got the role of Roy Kent. He secretly made an audition tape for the character and was perfectly okay just being a writer if he didn’t get it. But he did get it, and the rest is history.

People who look fondly on that first season of the show, nostalgic because of how it helped them through one of the weightiest times in recent history, could easily associate much of that lightening of the mood to him. He was in front of the camera and helped guide the story behind-the-scenes. He was one of the biggest creative influences over how Ted Lasso became what it was. And what it still is, since the fourth season is currently airing. He also got a couple Emmy awards for his performance, so there’s some prestige to the quality of his work, too.

I should note that I’m writing this from my Canadian perspective. I don’t know how big a deal Brett Goldstein was in the UK prior to being a part of Ted Lasso. I looked over his Wikipedia and saw that he wrote some stuff for Catharine Tate, and that he won a British Independent Film Award. I don’t have the same knowledge of that portion of his career. Nor does it really affect what I’m trying to say here. He became an international celebrity through Ted Lasso.

Brett Goldstein followed up his stellar work on Ted Lasso with another show, produced by Bill Lawrence, the television producer who helped create Ted Lasso and bring it to life. Goldstein teamed up with Lawrence and Jason Segel to create Shrinking. This show was about a group of therapists, their friends, their family, and how everyone, including the therapists, could use a support group. It’s my favourite show. I think it’s better than Ted Lasso, and I know other people who think the same. Not the point, though.

The point is that Brett Goldstein was involved in another great show. He now had a history of making great television that he helped write and shape. He also joined Shrinking as an onscreen performer in the second season. I don’t want to get into what his character’s role was, since I think people should check out the show, but there was some heartbreak to it. Shrinking has been an emotional ride, in a very, very good way. Fuck Parkinson’s.

So, yeah, for the North American audiences, these two shows were what people knew Brett Goldstein for most. They knew him for the quality of writing and performances in each of the shows. They knew him for the nostalgic comfort of Ted Lasso and the cathartic emotion of Shrinking. They knew he wrote good scripts or was at least involved in good scripts. That was the type of mindset audiences had when they saw that he was in a new movie for Netflix. That was the mindset they had when they saw that he wrote that new movie for Netflix.


Before I go on and bring all this baggage together, I should recap everything I’ve gone over so far. It’s been 3700 words since I began typing this post. That’s a lot of stuff to say before even getting to how it all built into the negative reaction to Office Romance. I’ve hinted at it. I’ve sometimes blatantly mentioned things. But I think a quick summary will paint the picture I’ve been working on this entire time. My rambling fingers are really working overtime for this post.

To summarize, I think people have unfairly been hating on the Netflix romantic comedy Office Romance, starring Brett Goldstein and Jennifer Lopez. There were two pieces of baggage that people brought into the movie that led to that train of thought. One, people had preconceived notions about the quality of projects put out on the streaming giant. They don’t like the idea of Netflix movies and, thus, were predisposed to disliking another. Two, people held Brett Goldstein to a very high standard due to his work on the shows Ted Lasso and Shrinking. They weren’t ready for something that might not strive for the same emotional connection those shows provided.

As I alluded to when I first described Office Romance, it was your basic, run-of-the-mill, superficial romantic comedy. It was two coworkers falling in love. One just happened to be the CEO of a multi-million-dollar company and the other was her lawyer. There wasn’t much depth to the characters to dig into. The lawyer had a sister in jail who he was looking out for. The CEO couldn’t get out from the shadow of her father, the founder of the company. It was just enough to make an audience feel for the characters, but not too much that would make the audience lose the romantic comedy of it all.

The baggage that people brought in from Office Romance being a Netflix movie made them immediately decide to tear it down. However, if you took the same movie and slapped Hallmark’s name on it as the production company instead of Netflix, people would fall in love with it. It followed many of the same tropes as a Hallmark romance, only with bigger, more recognizable stars. The down-to-earth British lawyer falling in love with the businesswoman? That screams Hallmark holiday movie, if I ever saw one.

When I look at Office Romance as a bigger-budget version of a Hallmark movie, it passes with flying colours. It told a story on par with any of those. It had jokes that landed well enough to get a small rise out of me. The side characters were interesting. The chemistry worked well enough to keep things chugging along. It was a perfectly fine movie that only got the negativity it got because some people will go out of their way to find reasons to hate on Netflix’s output. Some reasons are fair. I won’t deny that. But the hate for Netflix surely pushed people to come into Office Romance wanting to dislike it.

Then you look at the Brett Goldstein of it all. His two biggest successes were television shows where he and the other writers he worked with had hours upon hours to dive into the characters, their backstories, their emotions, their relationships with everyone around them, and bringing their inner thoughts out. There just isn’t time to do that in a movie. Television and movies are so closely linked, but there are some things that one form does better than the other and vice versa. Sure, if Office Romance was a character piece, that would be a different scenario. It wasn’t. It was your typical romantic comedy. You’re not going to spend the hour and a half of the romantic comedy breaking down the romantic histories of each character and what led them into the relationships they’re currently in. You’re not going to be able to explore the airline, how it was built up, how the main character became the CEO, and her relationship with the previous lawyer. You’re not going to have time to show how the lawyer had been taking care of his sister for a long time, how he made the decision to move close to her prison, and how he got the job at the airline.

I mean, I guess you could get into those things. But you can’t explore all of them or even that many of them in the confines of a romantic comedy movie. You only have an hour and a half, maybe two hours, to tell the entire story. That’s why I think it was a little unfair for people to expect the writing to be on the same level as Brett Goldstein’s other work. It wasn’t intended to be that same character study. If you took Ted Lasso and turned it into a movie, you wouldn’t have time to explore Ted’s panic attacks and divorce, Roy’s relationship with Keely and his coming to terms with retirement, Nate’s ambition and the issues with his father that he projected on Ted, Rebecca’s wanting revenge on her ex-husband and coming to love the team she now owned, Jamie’s turn from cocky star to team player, or fleshing out any of the supporting members of the team (Sam’s restaurant, Colin being gay, Isaac learning to be captain). There wouldn’t be time for that. Things would get trimmed.

It was unfair to expect a… Okay, it’s two hours… It was unfair to expect a two-hour romantic comedy to have the same level of depth and nuance as two three-season shows. Yet, I saw people saying they were shocked that Brett Goldstein would write something like Office Romance. I don’t think they were upset because of the writing as much as they were upset that it was different. People wanted the writing equivalent of type casting. That’s not what they got with Office Romance.


Of course, there was also the cunt scene. I saw that pointed to multiple times as something that people thought was bad writing. I don’t necessarily feel the same way. Did it fit within the movie? Maybe not as much as it could have. It kind of felt like a scene that could be taken out of the movie altogether. It wouldn’t change the movie at all. It simply felt like Brett Goldstein had worked on a stand-up bit and placed it into the movie. Because he’s a comedian.

What do I know, though? I’m just one guy sitting behind the screen of a laptop with his own opinion. I can drone on and on about why I think people came into Office Romance with the wrong mindset. Either they were ready to tear the movie down immediately, thanks to their dislike of Netflix, or they had their expectations set too high, thanks to what they decided Brett Goldstein was as a writer/performer.

I think Office Romance fell somewhere in between the expected hate and the expected high. It was perfectly okay. It wasn’t anything special. It wasn’t a travesty. It was something you could throw on in the background while cleaning or cooking and not have to think too much about. We need movies like that. We need some background noise and entertainment, or else life would be boring. Office Romance filled a necessary role in the world. Not enough people appreciate that.

I think I’ve done enough rambling for one day. Multiple days, actually. This is already 5000 words long. Do you think I wrote that in one day? Ha! I’m not that good of a writer, and absolutely not that good at time management. I can ramble, but even I get tired of my own rambling after a while.

I started this post out by saying that people choose one or two movies a year that they dub to be the worst movie ever made. Rarely do I agree with the movie they decided on. The movies tend to be much better than they were letting on. That’s because people have baggage. They come into movies, television, books, relationships, jobs, and any other odd thing in life with their own experiences. They have been influenced by different things. I wanted to take some time to look at some of this baggage and see how it got us to one of this year’s claims of worst movie. I think I did a decent job of that, even if I got rambly in there.


The last bit of rambling I need to do is this notes section:

  • Jackie Sandler played one of the airline employees in Office Romance. She’s been in numerous Sunday “Bad” Movies. They were Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo, Bucky Larson: Born to Be a Star, Sandy Wexler, The Ridiculous 6, and Pixels. That’s a total of six movies. How ridiculous is that?
  • A new Sunday “Bad” Movies five-timer was Tony Hale. He was in Office Romance, as well as American Ultra, Larry the Cable Guy: Health Inspector, Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Road Chip, and Yoga Hosers.
  • Jennifer Lopez starred in Office Romance. She was also in Anaconda, Money Train, and Gigli.
  • Will Sasso had a small role in Office Romance, but that wasn’t the only time he was featured in Sunday “Bad” Movies. He was also in Movie 43, Russell Madness, and Southland Tales.
  • Coming in at three movies was Norm Lewis. Not only was he in Office Romance, but he was in Winter’s Tale and Sex and the City 2.
  • You know who else made a third Sunday “Bad” Movies appearance in Office Romance? Jeffrey Mowery from The Happening and The Last Airbender.
  • Edward Jame Olmos returned to Sunday “Bad” Movies in Office Romance after first appearing in Beverly Hills Chihuahua.
  • Jerome Brooks Jr. has now been in two Sunday “Bad” Movies. They were Tracers and Office Romance.
  • Finally, the great Amy Sedaris has been in Office Romance and Space Buddies.
  • Have you seen Office Romance? What were your thoughts? Do you agree that people came in with expectations, both high and low, that made it easier for them to hate the movie? Let me know your thoughts in the comments, or get a hold of me on Bluesky.
  • If there’s a movie you think I should check out for a future Sunday “Bad” Movies post, find me in the comments or on Bluesky to let me know.
  • There’s not much different from the last post in terms of what’s coming up. This was a big one to write, and I’ve been focusing on it more than tossing another movie in the bad movie queue. I’ve still got Evil Bong 777 and Big Shark coming up. I don’t know about after that. I guess it depends on when I get those posts done and if I can sneak another horror movie in before October ends. I’ll see you next time for Evil Bong 777.
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, September 13, 2026

Fred: The Movie (2010), Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred (2011), and Fred 3: Camp Fred (2012)


The early days of YouTube were really a case of you had to be there to understand. YouTube in the present day is a place to watch videos and find the community that you fit into. YouTube back then was a world of stars. People were elevated beyond niche communities into legitimate fame. In some instances, fortune, too.

For some of the stars, YouTube was a stepping stone to bigger, better things. Bo Burnham’s comedy got big on YouTube, which led to specials, an acting career, and even a chance to direct the very good Eighth Grade. Shane Dawson was a part of a reality show that put him in the director’s chair for the very not good Not Cool. Ryan Higa got to star in a movie I’ve never seen that I’ve only heard bad things about and will likely get around to seeing at some point for this very blog.


Then there was Lucas Cruikshank. He was a little different than the others. Sure, other YouTubers from that time did some sketch stuff. That was a big thing in the early era. Lucas took that to a whole new level. His entire YouTube career was in character as Fred Figglehorn. More people probably know him by his character’s name than his actual name. That’s how big that single YouTube character was.

Lucas Cruikshank eventually got the movie treatment as well. His character, Fred, was picked up by Nickelodeon. They made a trilogy of movies following the character and his exploits. Fred made the jump from computer screens and the smartphones of the time onto… Well, it wasn’t the big screen. They were television movies. So onto bigger screens than what Fred had been on but not as big as the screens could have been.


Fred: The Movie was the perfect encapsulation of YouTube at the time. It was about Fred Figglehorn (Lucas Cruikshank) and his journey across his city as he tried to meet up with his crush, Judy (Pixie Lott). She used to be his neighbour, but her family moved to a different neighbourhood. At the same time, Fred had to avoid his bully, Kevin (Jake Weary). That’s about it for the story. Everything else just built on that stuff.

How did it encapsulate what YouTube was at the time? Well, this was 2010. The people who came to stardom on YouTube were still homing in on what the aesthetic of that streaming platform would be. There was a lot of jump cutting going on. There was a lot of talking to the camera. Those are still things that happen on YouTube, but not in the jarring way they happened back then. Fred: The Movie picked up on that style and brought it into the world of movies.

There were many scenes throughout Fred: The Movie that involved Fred running maniacally around his house screaming at the camera in his obnoxiously high voice. It was the same thing the character would do in his YouTube videos, only now it looked professionally made instead of filmed on a Canon MiniDV. It made much of the movie feel like a high-budget YouTube video instead of a movie. The story took a back seat to the vlogging style of Fred Figglehorn.


Anytime Fred: The Movie got away from that YouTube aesthetic, it turned into a series of sketches. Many of those sketches had some sort of taste of that aesthetic. None of it ever really gelled together. There was the scene where Fred dug a hole into the neighbour’s yard, only for it to be the wrong neighbour. There was the scene where he was buried at the beach. There was the scene where he saw a darker Lucas Cruikshank character on the bus. Kind of a yin and yang scenario. These didn’t build the story or push it forward. They were their own self-contained moments within the thin story being told.

The only scene/sketch I really liked in the entirety of Fred: The Movie was near the end when Fred and his best friend Bertha (Jennette McCurdy) put together a fake party video to try and make all their schoolmates jealous. Fred wasn’t invited to Judy’s party, so he was going to make his own. The best party ever. People would call it great. They would call it the greatest. There wouldn’t be another party as great as Fred’s. They would say that Fred threw the best parties, even though they weren’t there. Anyway, the scene where they made the fake party video felt the most like a movie out of anything in Fred: The Movie. Maybe it was just that I’d been worn down so much that having something like that was just refreshing. Maybe it was actually a good scene. I think it was because the scene felt like it did something for the story instead of being a tangent for Fred to be a goofball. It was the one time that what essentially felt like a sketch had been in integral part of the story being told.


Interestingly enough, the sequels would take a slightly different approach to how they portrayed Fred Figglehorn. Let’s get into Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred. This Halloween-themed Fred film saw Fred (Lucas Cruikshank) go up against his new music teacher, Mr. Delvin (Seth Morris). The teacher had replaced Fred’s favourite teacher and started dating his mom (Siobhan Fallon Hogan). At the same time, Fred was connecting with Talia (Ariel Winter), the sister of Kevin (Jake Weary). I should also mention that Fred’s dad was played by John Cena and Bertha was now played by Daniella Monet.

There were still moments in Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred that saw the titular character breaking the fourth wall to speak to the audience in a flurry of jump cuts. That wasn’t all gone. It was still a movie based on a YouTube character who was known for that style of YouTube video. However, it was pulled back a lot from what Fred: The Movie had done. More focus was placed on the story and letting that play out.


With the focus landing on the story rather than the YouTube of it all, it flourished in a way the previous movie couldn’t. It was no longer beholden to staying true to the original format. It was allowed to grow. Not too much, though. Fred still had to be Fred. He still had to, as he called it in his YouTube videos, “spaz out” at the audience occasionally. But the character was able to grow beyond his own little YouTube bubble. He was forced to be a little less self-centered. Breaking him out of that hosting position allowed for the growth.

Much like with Fred: The Movie, Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred had its best moment when an online video became part of the story. In the climax of the movie, Fred livestreamed himself venturing into his teacher’s house, looking for proof of Mr. Delvin being a vampire. People were watching the video. There were hiccups in the video. It was essentially a found footage horror film being live-streamed to everyone Fred knew. It allowed Fred’s vlogging personality to shine without it feeling the exact same as any old Fred YouTube video.


This growth of the franchise from being a modestly budgeted rehash of Fred videos into movies that felt like movies only continued in Fred 3: Camp Fred. This time, Fred (Lucas Cruikshank) was sent to Camp Iwannapeepee, owned by Floyd Spunkmeyer (Tom Arnold). It was the run-down seeming camp, compared to the pristine rival, Camp Superior, where his bully Kevin (Jake Weary) was staying. Fred didn’t like his camp and tried to figure out what was wrong with it, until a rivalry competition showed him how to find the perfection in imperfection. Yeah, it was a ragtag group of camp underdogs. That’s my kind of movie.

The most interesting thing about Fred 3: Camp Fred was how it ended up being a dissection of the two movies that had come before. That’s not the right word, but dissection works for now. The third movie played with what the first two movies were, before becoming its own thing. It even made some meta commentary along the way. It started with the vlog-like style as Fred talked about going to camp, as he got to camp, and as he suspected there were things going wrong at camp. It became what Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred had been, a movie about Fred trying to stop a monster. However, that was all flipped on its head about halfway through (whoa! A halfway turning point, like a real movie) when Fred allowed himself to start connecting with his campmates and enjoy his time at the less luxurious camp.


After that, Fred 3: Camp Fred felt like its own thing. It became a standard summer camp movie, only with Fred Figglehorn attending the camp. The fourth wall breaks were few, if there were any. The suspicion of monsters was gone. The third entry didn’t even include a climactic online video release. It became a narrative movie where Fred Figglehorn just happened to be a character. It became what the film series should have been from the beginning, a proper film series. Oh, and the meta aspects? The one that most stuck in my mind was Fred in a dream, talking in a normal voice, saying he dreamt that he had an annoying high-pitched voice. This was a movie that set expectations, subverted them, and became something special in a trilogy of not-so-great movies.

I would never try to claim that Fred: The Movie, Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred, or Fred 3: Camp Fred were good movies. None of them were good. But there is something to be said for watching a film series grow with each installment. Watching it begin as one thing and change over time to become something else. Usually, that’s for the worse. In the case of the Fred movies, they got stronger with each outing. The writers learned that when adapting a YouTube personality to film, it would be better to come at it from the perspective of film rather than the perspective of YouTube. The movies didn’t need to be YouTube on a bigger budget. They needed to show what could be done with a YouTube character in another medium.


Fred Figglehorn was one of many YouTube personalities who made their way to the bigger screens. Again, these were television movies, so they weren’t the big screen. They were just bigger than the YouTube screens of the time. Other people like Shane Dawson and Bo Burnham and Ryan Higa also made the jump to movies. Most of them didn’t have success. What worked in one medium didn’t necessarily work in the other. But when they allowed themselves to grow, like the Fred movies grew or like Bo Burnham has always grown, they managed to carve out their own little world in film where some special things could happen.

YouTube isn’t like those early days anymore. At that time, the whole of YouTube was one large community. It was the YouTube community. Things have since gotten much more specific. There are the gamers, the film people, the architecture people, the roller coaster people, the comedy people, the music people, the makeup people, the travel people, and many others. Even within those, there are smaller niches. Do you like puzzle video games, RPGs, shooters, multiplayer games, platformers, or speedrunning? Each of those have their own worlds. We won’t ever see the likes of early YouTube again because so many people stay within their own smaller communities. The stars aren’t as plentiful. YouTube has changed.


Now let’s get to the notes, and I’m sure there will be a lot:

  • I’m going to start with a link to Not Cool, since I brought that up in the post.
  • There were two people who debuted in Sunday “Bad” Movies this week who appeared in all three Fred movies. They were Lucas Cruikshank and Siobhan Fallon Hogan.
  • Fred: The Movie and Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred featured Stephanie Courtney, Alicia Favela, and Pixie Lott.
  • Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred and Fred 3: Camp Fred featured Peter Hogan, Carlos Knight, and Daniella Monet.
  • The first person to be featured in more than just Fred movies was Frank Welker. He did some work on Fred: The Movie. He was also featured in eight other movies for Sunday “Bad” Movies. They were Anaconda, Mortal Kombat, Hudson Hawk, GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords, Super Mario Bros., Godzilla, Scooby-Doo! The Mystery Begins, and Scooby-Doo! Curse of the Lake Monster. That’s a lot of movies.
  • John Cena has officially joined the five-timers club. He was in all three Fred movies, and previously showed up in The Marine and 12 Rounds.
  • Beverly Polcyn made her fourth Sunday “Bad” Movies appearance in Fred 3: Camp Fred. Her other three appearances were Date Movie, Bucky Larson: Born to Be a Star, and All About Steve.
  • Another fourth appearance in Fred 3: Camp Fred came for Tom Arnold. This recognizable face was also in Exit Wounds, The Stupids, and Golf Punks.
  • The final fourth appearance was for Jake Weary. He was in all three Fred movies. He was also in Zombeavers.
  • John Gatins was in Norbit before reappearing in Fred: The Movie and Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred.
  • You may have noticed Chris Wylde in Fred: The Movie and Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred. He also had a role in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
  • Fred: The Movie featured a performance by Eddy Martin, who was previously seen in Hansel and Gretel Get Baked.
  • Kirsten Berman was in Bucky Larson: Born to Be a Star and Fred: The Movie.
  • Do you remember Gary Anthony Williams in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows? He showed up in Fred: The Movie, too.
  • The final Fred: The Movie actor to be in another movie for Sunday “Bad” Movies was Franklin Ruehl, who appeared in Balls of Fury.
  • Onto Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred, we have Ariel Winter. She was also in Nic and Tristan Go Mega Dega.
  • The other Fred 2: Night of the Living Dead actor to mention is Ben Wang, who was in Independence Day: Resurgence. This isn’t the Ben Wang who is becoming a popular actor right now. Different Ben Wang.
  • Madison Riley popped up in Fred 3: Camp Fred. She also popped up in Bratz.
  • Jack and Jill and Fred 3: Camp Fred each featured Luke Broadlick.
  • I promise this will be the final time Bucky Larson: Born to Be a Star comes up in this post. It featured Adam Herschman, who was in Fred 3: Camp Fred.
  • Philip Albuquerque took a wrong turn from Scooby-Doo! Curse of the Lake Monster and ended up in Fred 3: Camp Fred.
  • Finally, Romel De Silva was in Fred 3: Camp Fred and He’s All That.
  • Have you seen any of the Fred movies? What did you think of them? Share your thoughts in the comments or find me on Bluesky and let me know there.
  • If there’s a movie you think I should check out for a future Sunday “Bad” Movies post, get a hold of me in the comments or Bluesky and let me know. I’m always open to movies I haven’t seen yet.
  • Okay, it’s time to give a quick look at what’s coming up in future posts. I have one more post before I get spooky. Office Romance should be coming up next week or the week after. Then we’ll get to October, where I have a pair of horror movie posts planned. One will be the result of continuing my voyage through the Evil Bong franchise with Evil Bong 777. Following that, I finally got to check out Tommy Wiseau’s Big Shark. That seems like a solid spooky season lineup to me. I’ll see you soon for more Sunday “Bad” Movies stuff.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)