Reader comments
Nothing But Trouble

Rochelle Walker | 11:51 p.m. April 7, 2000

First, it's a comedy based on the works of Charles Addams.
He created the Addams family and made dark humor a
household
name. Second, it was filled with a top-notch cast. And
third, Dan Akroyd was having fun. He made the movie for
fun. Something silly and titilating. I loved it. I
thought it was a good movie. But I also like Elvira, The
Addams Family and the Munsters as well. People shouldnt be
so critical of Akroyd or the film. Ask yourself, could you
have done any better? I couldnt. I give it two thumbs
up!And even though this is 2000, I still watch that crazy
movie, especially on rainy, cold nights when I just feel
silly.

Mark Guice | 4:58 p.m. April 22, 2000

I thought it was a great movie. I think they knew it was
not going to be up for an award. Just a fun movie made by
the characters. Could hit cult status one day. I have
watched it at least twenty times.

Avi Green | 4:41 a.m. May 3, 2000

The title says it all.

veronica | 3:46 p.m. June 10, 2000

i thought the house was the star of the movie and so was
the
junkyard. the reason i liked the film was becuase it was
just SOOOOO wierd!

ed | 12:02 p.m. July 20, 2000

I found the movie quite interesting. The comedy is there
but
it is drier than dry. I'm a fan of British humor and
perhaps
thats why I found it intriguing. The movie was horrid and
gory on the surface but if you really look at
Vaulkenheimers, they were one screwed up group and I found
it comical in the way they live. I wouldn't trash the movie
but instead look at the special effects and the fact it is
funny in a wierd way.

Mary Rahl | 8:22 p.m. Nov. 25, 2004

Still enjoying it after all these years. This is not meant
to be rocket science folks! Falsto was a kick in this and
he makes me laugh every time I see it! Far worse movies out
there to be sure!! Miss John Candy.

m@ | 11:07 p.m. July 3, 2006

I HATED IT!!!. it was just plain disturbing...... it
started slow and went straight to horribly bad and
disturbing. I found this on a another sight and i could
not have said it better myself, (Sometimes I wish that I
could take some kind of hypnotic therapy so that I can
have my memory of this film wiped for all time, but then I
think that if I did that, I might accidentally watch it
again, and then the pain would be fresh again.).... yea it
was that bad. I am warning you DO NOT WATCH IT!!!!!!!!
*twitch*........

ello | 9:26 p.m. Aug. 4, 2006

Very twisted. It's like you're in someone's nightmare. I
personally didn't think it was amazingly funny but my
cousin thought it was hilarious (no she's not psychotic).
I just think that this movie was made for people with a
certain type of humor. I liked the mansion though. I think
I'll have my future house built like that.

Kayla Daniels | 6:06 p.m. Aug. 25, 2006

I loved it!Aykroyd acted a little wierd,but its a comedy
ya all should watch it.The only thing I didn't like is that
Dan Aykroyd shouldn't be described as the bad guy!I wasn't
expecting that!

Jasper von Haemoglobin | 5:36 p.m. July 27, 2009

This is the worst movie ever made.

bigband | 6:38 a.m. Aug. 26, 2009

Was endlessly waiting for something funny to happen. I felt sorry for the actors; then myself and my friends. Horrible movie. This movie should be pulled from the shelves; or given to college cinema students as a lesson how not to write a movie. No one mentioned the vintage rap group that got off "Scott Free". Ouch. I will never forget this awful waste of visual space and time.

Cory | 1:17 p.m. Nov. 6, 2009

I enjoyed this movie even from when it first came out. I have it on DVD and watch it every few months. It's weird and disgusting and kind of a guilty pleasure.

Tom_the_movie_critic | 11:33 p.m. Jan. 6, 2011
Mchenry, Il

Consider this: This is one of the biggest box office losers of all time, a certified disaster. It got a score of only 10% at Rotten Tomatoes, which is abysmal. This movie was the kiss of death for Aykroyd's directorial career; even after 20 years he's never directed again. Aykroyd won a Razzie for Worst Supporting Actor. The nearly universal response from critics was that it was extremely unfunny. This film certainly is beloved by people who enjoy strange, unfunny comedies. Nearly everything about this film is tragic. That's what happens when the same guy writes, directs and acts in the same film: there's nobody to stop the disaster. The most amazing thing is, this flop cost $40 million, but only made $7 million! That's right, for every dollar it earned, it lost five. Don't think maybe it might be so bad that it's good. It's almost unwatchable, and terribly, traumatically unfunny.

Your comment

Please login
Our comments feature has changed Click here to find out more.
Comments are accepted from registered users using a validated display name.
* Email address
* Password
	Remember me on this computer.