Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

What's the worst movie you ever sat through?


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

(question inspired by TNPanther's "Fifty Shades of Grey" thread)

 

So what's the absolute worst piece of cinematic dreck you've ever managed to sit through all the way to the bitter end?

 

Flipside Question: Have you ever seen something so incredibly bad you couldn't even finish watching it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahhh man, there were so many. Let's see:

Robocop 3

Twilight

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Sabotage

Batman & Robin

Terminator 3

The Breakfast Club

Green Lantern

Dumb & Dumber

Gigi

Majority of Nicolas Cage's films

Never Back Down

The Expendables 2

Any recent Adam Sandler movie

Etc

Etc

Etc

Etc

 

Ya stop in the middle of any of those?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Johnny Depp Lone Ranger movie.

Now if you'd asked about movies I hope I never have to watch again, I have a list of them.

That's an interesting sub-category.

There are movies I genuinely liked, but given the opportunity to watch them again, I'd pass.

"In the Bedroom" falls into that category. It's a film about two parents killing their late daughter's husband because they believe he killed her. Very well made movie, but left me feeling like I'd just taken part in doing something awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dark Skies was abysmal. And I honestly couldn't sit through Lincoln. Daniel Day Lewis may be an inspiration to the acting world but in mine he is a cure for insomnia.

Vampire Hunter was a much better Lincoln movie. Whoever decided having a fight scene with stampeding horses is a genius. Also it has Mary Elizabeth Winstead from Rocky Mount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • That is just Panthers history pain speaking.
    • From what I gather, sure it allows you more room in that you can manipulate the cap more due to smaller prorated amounts to fit salaries in, but for cap purposes, you're still on the hook for the money at the end of the day.    "ChatGPT You said: What are the advantages for NFL teams to sign larger signing bonuses? ChatGPT said: NFL teams often use large signing bonuses as a strategic tool in contracts. While they cost real cash up front, they offer several advantages, especially when it comes to salary cap management, player retention, and negotiation leverage. Here's a breakdown of the benefits: ✅ 1. Salary Cap Flexibility Signing bonuses are prorated over the life of the contract (up to 5 years) for salary cap purposes. This allows teams to spread out the cap hit, even if the player receives the money immediately. Example: A $20M signing bonus on a 4-year deal counts only $5M/year against the cap. ✅ 2. Attracting Top Talent Players love signing bonuses because they're guaranteed money paid up front. Offering a bigger signing bonus can sweeten the deal without inflating yearly salaries. ✅ 3. Front-Loading Real Cash, Not Cap Teams with strong cash flow can pay big bonuses now while minimizing the immediate cap hit. Useful for teams trying to build around rookie QB contracts or with flexible cash budgets. ✅ 4. Locking in Key Players Larger bonuses make it harder for a player to be released early due to dead cap consequences. This can create more job security for the player and roster continuity for the team. ✅ 5. Leverage in Restructures Big signing bonuses create future cap hits via proration. Teams can later restructure deals (e.g., convert salary to bonus) to create even more cap space. ✅ 6. Competitive Edge In free agency, a team offering more guaranteed cash up front often wins the bidding war, even if the total contract value is lower than another team's. ⚠️ Key Caveat: Large signing bonuses increase dead cap risk if the player is cut or traded early."   I think that roster bonuses can be a useful tool if you're trying to keep players in by manipulating numbers and spreading the hit over time, but I don't think that it's something that you want to use unless it's "necessary." I don't know that you want to get into signing rookies on roster bonuses, as the bust rate is relatively high.    
    • not even if that team in New Orleans disbands before the first game.  Saw one 2026 mock that had them drafting first next year.  
×
×
  • Create New...