web
counter
 

Holy Slithering Naked Woman: A Showgirls 2?

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Trailers | Comments (39)



showgirls2trailer.jpg

Movieline dug this up, along with a series of the best still images from the Showgirls 2 trailer, so when you start tossing around profanities, please direct them accordingly.

The story here is that apparently some European production company scraped together $25 million to make a sequel to Showgirls. I have no earthly idea what they did with that $25 million, because what’s presented in this trailer looks like it probably ran them around $14 and some change.

It is horrid. And though the original Showgirls was terrible as well, there’s nothing particularly amusing about this, except in how little sense it makes. You’d think that most heterosexual males wouldn’t turn away from a trailer that begins with a naked woman slithering toward her death (by free weight), or that features a girl-on-girl scene sometime later in the trailer, but if you can actually make it to the end of this trailer, you’re a stronger person than I.

In fact, at some point, I turned off the sound on my computer, and yet the trailer continued to blare on. That’s the power of the Showgirls 2 trailer.

Watch It By Clicking Here. Note, it’s got naughty things in it that you oughtn’t be watching in your cubicles. And it’s full screen.









Blog Trends from My Bunk 02/23/10 | Hell by Robert Olen Butler













Comments

Holy Mother.

I think your estimate of $14 is high by about $8.25 or so.

Maaaan, I haven't seen anything that shitty since...probably about 1982, which, seriously, is about the year I'd have guessed this trailer was shot.

Posted by: Jerce at February 23, 2010 10:23 PM

Well, clearly they spent the budget on drugs. Lots and lots of drugs.

So this is a revenge thriller, if I read the synopsis on Movieline correctly? They did a nice job of getting that across in the trailer - watch as a woman pathetically mimics hitting another one with a free weight! Thrill at the blurry, grainy shots of Las Vegas! Gasp as a car sloooooowly rolls towards the camera and then stops!

Posted by: Meli Mel at February 23, 2010 10:28 PM

What... what just happened? I feel like maybe somebody slipped me a mickey, or something... Was that woman at the beginning crippled? I don't understand why she was slithering... and I have no idea what this movie is about. Though if I had to guess from the music, I'd say it was some kind of sequel to one of the Halloween movies. My God, that may be the worst thing I've ever seen in my life. Really. And that's saying something.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverpuppet at February 23, 2010 10:31 PM

Um, what's happening in that header pic? Because there's at least one extra arm in there, and is that supposed to be a leg or some sort of furniture she's licking? In an office?

Posted by: ScienceGeek at February 23, 2010 10:37 PM

VER-SAYSSSS!!!
Actually, I have been to some hilarious midnite screenings of the original, where a theater full of screaming 'fans' can quote whole sections of dreadful dialogue, sort of like 'RockyHorror' crossed with 'Valley of the Dolls'...and I did once really like the work of Paul Verhoeven and Joe Eszterhas. Oh Nomi..how profaned your legacy.I gotta agree, the trailer was torture.

Posted by: devildoggie at February 23, 2010 10:50 PM

It's being made by a dude from Denmark, which explains a lot. You should see their tourism ads.

Posted by: Gozer at February 23, 2010 10:55 PM

This is 70's Euro porn. You can't fool me. Nice try.

Posted by: ed newman at February 23, 2010 11:12 PM

wow, without making any reference to how stinky the original movie was, that was a bland and blank putrid trailer. please tell me no film resulted from it

Posted by: idleprimate at February 23, 2010 11:25 PM

Yeah, That was rrhhhheeeaaalllyy bad...

Posted by: Brian at February 23, 2010 11:31 PM

No, no ,no, you've got it all wrong. It's not meant to be serious! It's the porno version (as if it needed one) of Showgirls. You know, like, Good Will Humping or Shaving Ryan's Privates. That kind of thing, right!...right? Please God, someone tell me I'm right.

Posted by: wildflower at February 23, 2010 11:43 PM

Is it April 1 already?

Posted by: Mark at February 24, 2010 12:08 AM

I like how you can see the wet trail where they had attempted multiple takes of the nude girl slithering from the tub.

Posted by: adam at February 24, 2010 12:24 AM

It shows they are really trying to get it right.

Posted by: adam at February 24, 2010 12:24 AM

The horror! The horror!

Posted by: Human Centipede, 1st Segment at February 24, 2010 12:40 AM

This is not a 'sequel' to *shudder* Showgirls, this is a Euro sub-porno (i.e. a bit of tit, and maybe a hint of the good stuff) trading on the good name of said movie. And actually making Showgirls look like a well made film.

Btw, the girl at the start can't be paraplegic, she's using her legs to move. That's how good the acting in this godtopus-forsaken piece of shit is.

Posted by: frank (aka frank_247 aka the lone Scotsman) at February 24, 2010 1:01 AM

*sets bar an inch off floor*

Elizabeth Berkeley would class that thing up.

Posted by: , at February 24, 2010 1:04 AM

They even skimped on the weights. "A two pounder shoulds be enough, ja? "Ja, we'll makes it more sinisters in editing"

Posted by: Ian at February 24, 2010 1:04 AM

I kept expecting to see jar jar binks walk in...

Posted by: tylermac41 at February 24, 2010 1:14 AM

That was a powerfully awful trailer. I gave it a shot because I thought the girl in the photo looked like Amy Smart, but there's nothing Smart about this movie at all.

I love Twitchy Mcgee, the guy who shoots the two people in the bar. I bet he thinks he looks like Pacino in Godfather but he looks more like Katharine Hepburn in On Golden Pond.

I still don't know what this is about. There was apparently a girl who didn't have the use of her legs crawling to where she was beaten by a third rate Tilda Swinton knockoff. Then some dancers, then Vegas, then a failed coke buy, then some more dancers and finally a car pulls up. Was it a car ad? I have no freakin clue. I've had Patron and Del Taco dumps that were clearer than this.

I am saddened that they took a classic and tainted its name by attaching this clusterfuck to it. You mock the names of Berkeley, Davi and Gershon and all the brilliant work they stood for. For shame.

Posted by: Rubble44 at February 24, 2010 1:24 AM

A long-winded, random, and unintelligible movie trailer?
So this is what Adventureman does on the weekends.

Posted by: Jim Doggie at February 24, 2010 1:57 AM

This makes that bird movie from yesterday look like a fucking masterpiece.

Posted by: MM at February 24, 2010 1:57 AM

I want Geoff Schaaf to present everything from now on

Posted by: A. Biro at February 24, 2010 3:11 AM

wow, that video was amazing. and it just kept going and going. and you forgot to mention there is a dog in the girl on girl scene! also, that girl sucking the nectar off her fingers looked like Pink. and holy crap, when the weird colors stopped and it went to flesh tones it actually got worse. freaking. amazing.

Posted by: EricD at February 24, 2010 3:31 AM

You see, so hot!! HAHA~~ That's cool I met my perfect man on the club AgeGapLove.com. BUt he is 15 years older than me. A big problem??

Posted by: yousee at February 24, 2010 3:51 AM

I am strangely intrigued by the music.
Anyone know what song that is??

Posted by: AlwaysConfused at February 24, 2010 4:56 AM

Psht, that's just European porn...or

So I'm told...

Is...is that a Polar bear? *wanders off*

Posted by: Nadine at February 24, 2010 5:53 AM

Jesus fuck.

I watched that pile steam away right to the end, hoping that I'd at least get a Rick Roll payoff, but no.

Instead I got shite Euro porn sans penetration.

And then a Maserati in a parking garage.

I'm actually looking forward to going to work now.

Fuck you Movieline.

Posted by: Groundloop at February 24, 2010 8:14 AM

BUDGET FOR SHOWGIRLS: THE RETURN
Director: $1,000,000
Producer: $1,000,000
Marketing: $1,000,000
Vegas Hotel Rooms/Parking Garages ("Sets"): $22,000
Maserati rental: $750,000
Costumes: $173
Makeup: $17 (Maybeline was on sale and the Key Grip had a coupon)
Film and Equipment: $500,000
Beverages: $3,000,000
Amsterdam whores ("actresses"): $50/hour
Babysitters for actress' fatherless children: $20/hour
"Motivation" for crew and talent: $18,000,000
Kleenex for "colds" and nosebleeds: $10,000
Catering: $74

Posted by: Kballs at February 24, 2010 8:46 AM

Haters. Ur just mad because theyr hot and ur soooooo ugly. U wish u hot like me then u could make skeevy movies too.

Posted by: Sparkletits at February 24, 2010 9:11 AM

I think they forgot a few words if the title.

Showgirls: The Return of the Clap

Posted by: admin at February 24, 2010 9:12 AM

Wow. That was spectacularly lame. Was that Vegas footage from someone's home movie collection? The freakin' Stardust doesn't even exist anymore.

There was a "Seinfeld" episode that talked about good naked vs. bad naked. The original "Showgirls" was mostly bad naked. This trailer merits a completely new designation for naked...perhaps "the kind that makes you want to go celibate."

Posted by: Phibes at February 24, 2010 9:14 AM

Umm...wow

That trailer sucked in a way no other trailer that ever came before it has sucked...

I only made ot to the end 'cuz you challenged me to

Posted by: Groucho at February 24, 2010 9:15 AM

The Return.
It's called Showgirls: The Return
Like the original Showgirls was a horror movie or something. Warning: Showgirls: The Return will not only contain graphic amounts of nudity, cheesy editing, and horrible kill scenes, but the dancers are just plain old strippers now. Strippers that kill. Kill. KILL.

I'ma see it.

Posted by: DeistBrawler at February 24, 2010 10:33 AM

Posted by: Jim Doggie at February 24, 2010 1:57 AM
---
snork

Posted by: , at February 24, 2010 10:35 AM

Wow. I watch bad movies for fun all the damn time, but this thing... Wow.

And I gotta disagree with the budget posted above. Here's my take: this is basically The Hangover but real. A bunch of douches and sluts went to Vegas, spent a week or two black out drunk/high, woke up with no money nor any memory of anything save for the footage shot on a few video cameras. And an old Amiga on which to edit it all together.

Drunken Vegas Debacle: 20 mil

Movie: the least brain dead douche spent a month's worth of spare time slapping this thing together.

I've just spent more time thinking about the making of this film than the actual makers of this film did.

I'd ask for someone to hold me, but this trailer has made me fear human contact.

Posted by: opiejuankenopie at February 24, 2010 1:42 PM

Wow. I didn't think anything would be able to top that "Birds: Pandemic" trailer from a couple days ago but... wow

Posted by: THRILLHO at February 24, 2010 2:34 PM

Huh. The damn thing's so bad that even George Lucas wouldn't attach his name to it. 'Geoff Schapp' indeed.

Posted by: FriendlessNerd at February 24, 2010 3:19 PM

Damn, I thought Geoff Schapp was Dutch for Alan Smithee. I'm sure they could at least have gotten Screech and Mr. Belding for this.

Posted by: mrcreosote at February 24, 2010 9:07 PM

Jeg så dit indlæg er det så interessant at se og fuldt med masser af sjov og glæde, hvor meget jeg syntes jeg kan ikke forklare det. Det er forbløffende.

Posted by: sexpartner at March 8, 2010 8:32 AM


















Viral Hits

>> Pajiba Movie Posters

>> Pop Culture's 20 Greatest Dancing GIFs

>> Mindhole Blowers

>> The 100 Greatest Insults of All Time

>> The "Other" 100 Greatest Movie Quotes

>> The 100 Greatest Movie Threats of All Time

>> The Sean Bean Death Reel

>> Chicks Dig Beards: It's Science

>> The Coolest TV Show Title Sequences

>> The Most Rewatchable Movies

>> The Most Expensive Movies of All Time