My Unfortunate Experience with Spee-Dee Delivery, Ankeny Location.

Looking for work, I applied for an assortment of jobs when I finally got a call back from Spee-Dee Delivery.  I went in for an interview and was offered a job as a night driver.  I took it thinking it'd be a perfect job for me.  Working at night, driving on the open road, and having to deal with a minimum of people. I thought right and I should have trusted my intuition. Yet it's hard to trust your gut, especially when people look you right in the face and lie to you, the way Spee-Dee Delivery representative Aaron did.

He called me in the Thursday before the Monday I was supposed to start.  He looked me right in the eye and said to me, "You really enjoy driving positions right?"

I told him that I did.

He proceeded to inform me that the night driver position that I had taken, involved very little driving.  That I would spend most of my time in the warehouse, doing hard physical work.  If I was lucky, I might take a load out on the road once or twice a week. Other than that, my shifts would be spent in the warehouse emptying/loading trucks and sorting packages.

"But I do have an open route in the Carroll area." He said to me. "You'll do a lot of driving there."

I agreed to do the Carroll route, trusting that Aaron was telling me the truth.  A trust that I never should have put in him.

After three months of rough, 11-12 hour days in a vehicle with no air conditioning that often had an assortment of problems, I ran into the guy that they eventually hired to do the night route that I had originally been hired for.

"So you spend most of your time in the warehouse then huh?" I asked him.

"Oh Heavens no." He said to me. "Maybe an hour at the beginning of my shift, if that.  I load my truck, and then drive to Omaha and drop off half my load.  I then take the other half up to Sioux City and then I drive back to the terminal."

That's two hours to Omaha, an hour and a half to Sioux City, three hours back to Ankeny.   6 1/2 hours of driving.  I would like to know how Aaron could justify 6 1/2 hours is "very little driving."

On top of that he was paid $0.25 more an hour than I was.

Nevertheless, even though Aaron had deliberately lied to me, I stuck with the Carroll route.

Hating the route for various reasons, I began looking into other opportunities including possibly going to trucking school to learn to drive semis.  I had submitted an application to a trucking school in Des Moines, that trained in exchange for driving for them for one year.

When I told a fellow coworker of mine, Phil, the semi-truck driver who had the St. Cloud route, he informed me that he was transferring up to St. Cloud and that his route was opening up.  He suggested that I try and get his job. His job paid $150 more per week ($600 a month more) than what I was making.  It involved taking a trailer up to St. Cloud, dropping it off and then taking another trailer back to Des Moines.  I put in an application for it immediately.

Aaron came up to me one morning and informed me that he saw that I had applied for the St. Cloud route. I told him that I had.  He said to me that they were excited to see me show interest in the position and that as long as I was able to obtain a class A CDL that the position would be mine.

If I'm ever made an offer like that again, I vow that I will get it in writing.

I told Aaron that I'd help him to find a replacement for me on the Carroll if he would like.

Aaron informed me that I needed to study for, take and  pass three written examinations, and then my training to drive the semi would begin on Monday July 17th.

I took the time (as well as money) to study for and pass the written examinations of Air Breaks, General Knowledge and Combination Vehicles.

Aaron informed me once again that training would begin on July 17th.  He said most take between 3 to 5 weeks to learn how to drive the truck.

Monday July 17th came, and Aaron informed me that my training had been moved back to July 24th.

July 24th became July 31st.  July 31st became August 7th.

Considering that Phil's last day was August 25th, I saw the writing on the wall.

I told Aaron one morning that I wanted to speak with him in private.  I went into his office and questioned him about what was going on.

He informed that that they were having a difficult time finding someone to fill my position and after some thought they found it more beneficial to the company to hire someone who already had a class A CDL for the St. Cloud position, than to train me.

I asked him why I wasn't informed about their decision earlier. He answered that they had other issues far more important and didn't feel a need to prioritize it.  I told him that I felt I had been treated unfairly and that I felt I was owed an apology.

I didn't receive one, although he did use the word sorry.

"I'm sorry you feel that way, but we are not Stephen Stonebraker company." He said to me. "We're Spee-Dee Delivery and we have done and will continue to do what we feel is best for Spee-Dee Delivery."

I said to him, "Ok. Well thank you for the opportunity to work here but I want to say that I will be leaving as soon as I find something better or by the 18th of August.

He then said, "We may have other CDL positions that eventually open up. Keep that in mind."

Considering that Aaron had already lied to me various times, I decided not to believe it.

I came in the next day and the truck that I normally drove was not in my parking space.  Instead, an older truck. One that was obviously in horrible shape sat in its spot.

I could go into explicit detail on all of the problems the truck had, but I think the fact that it broke down on my four times, will suffice.

The last time it broke down on me,  I was driving in downtown Carroll when suddenly the Truck died.  Luckily I had enough momentum to coast into the Walgreen's parking lot. There I sat for an hour until Spee-Dee finally had a local mechanic in Carroll come to help me. After examining the truck, he said that he couldn't figure out in the Walgreen's parking lot and would have to tow me back to his shop.

Upon examining the truck, he found and assortment of things wrong with the truck.  He had me call Spee-Dee to talk to the mechanic department. He told the mechanic that the truck was in no shape to have been put on the road and that by all means, he should notify the Department of Motor Vehicles of the trucks condition.

The truck didn't have a starter.  It must have fallen off somewhere between Des Moines and Carroll, and that was the main reason I had so much trouble with it.

After fighting with the Spee-Dee Mechanics, he ended up hanging up on them half way in between the conversation and told me that they were some of the dumbest individuals he had ever spoken to.

He informed me that he was going to tow me back to Des Moines because....and I quote...."I've been a mechanic for close to thirty years and that is the most dangerous, unsafe commercial vehicle I have ever laid my hands on." 

He said as bad of shape as the truck was in, I was lucky that I hadn't been seriously injured or worse driving it.

I tried to notify Aaron three times on my way back to the shop, as well as Spee-Dee representatives Nate and Delmer.  None were available to take my call.

The only person I got a hold of, after multiple attempts was Jeremy my route supervisor.  He told me that he'd have Randy and Jeff (fellow co-workers) take care of my pickups, but as for the over 40 deliveries I had left, I was going to have to add them to Wednesday's route.  My route on Wednesday was going to be around 85 stops.  On a good day, with no lunch breaks, not even giving myself time to stop and take a leak, I was lucky if I could get 60 stops done in my 12 hour shift.  There was no way I was going to get 85 done the next day with no help.

I guess feelings without proof are nothing more than accusations. Yet to think that Aaron deliberately put me in that unsafe and dangerous vehicle a day after I told him that I didn't appreciate his dishonesty and unprofessionalism, in the least gives him motive. 

I figured that Aaron had lied to me on three occasions, he had put me into a dangerous and unsafe vehicle. I had put up with enough. 

I went home, threw my work uniforms into the wash, waited for them to dry and then took them all back to the office.  I informed Betty another worker of what had happened to me and that I was leaving.  She shook my hand and said it was about time someone stood up for themselves against this crooked and rotten company.

Aaron has since said, and still says to this day that he never lied to me about the night position.  We simply have a different definition of what "a lot of driving" is and isn't.  I consider 6 1/2 hours of driving in a 9-10 hour shift to be a substantial amount of driving.  He doesn't.   He also says that I was never promised the St. Cloud CDL position. He says that he knew of my interest in the position, and did inform me that there was a possibility that they might select me for the job.  I questioned that if that were the case, why make a priority of me studying for, taking and passing the examinations.  Why give me a training start date of 7-17-2017?   His answer is because CDL positions open up from time to time, and he would like me prepared for when they do.  Funny, as those test scores are only good up to 90 days after you take them. 

Lastly Aaron said that in regards to the vehicle being "the most unsafe and dangerous commercial vehicle" that the mechanic in Carroll had ever seen, that opinions vary, and that was not the opinion of the mechanics at Spee-Dee Delivery in Des Moines.

In the end Spee-Dee Delivery came out on top. They win and I lose.  I don't think that's right.  Regardless of how you feel about my quitting the job or about the way in which I quit, I believe I have a right to have my employer be honest with me and tell the truth.  I know, as it is not a matter of subjective opinion, that I have a right, a legal right to be in a safe environment while working. It was wrong of them to put me in a vehicle that a mechanic of over thirty years experience deemed, "The most dangerous, unsafe commercial vehicle" that he had ever seen.

People like Aaron get away with lying to their employees and intentionally putting them into dangerous situations.  They shouldn't and I feel it my duty as an American citizen, a member of the American labor force, to expose him for his crooked, and unprofessional behavior.

Could I Have Ever Been Practical?

I look back on my life a lot and wonder where I went wrong. It's hard not to. I graduated high school when I was 18 years old. Thirteenth out of fifty-two kids, 3.3 GPA.  High enough to mention I suppose but not high enough to matter.  For shits and giggles or more so to prove my father's point correct, I remember searching for jobs that summer. 

I had my choice between shitty jobs with shitty pay or "Come sell insurance for us!"

At the time it sure seemed like Dad knew what he was talking about.  The years of preaching.  The shoving it down my throat on a daily basis. The yelling and the three hour long lectures that went with it whenever a grade was below a C. It all made sense. A college degree was necessary.  It was essential.

I had a lot of confidence at the time. A lot of belief in myself and what I was capable of. Perhaps that was my downfall. My whole life and I do mean my whole life. I mean then, I mean now, I mean 25 years from now-All I've ever wanted to do with my life was somehow in someway be part of the entertainment business.  If you ever wonder why I seem like a depressed and bitter miser, its because that's what I want to do with my life and I'm not doing it.

I don't know if you could have talked me out of going down that road. I know I chose the wrong college to go to. I do know that. And maybe that in itself is the answer. Maybe it's not what I studied, but where I studied it.

My Dad doesn't seem to think so.

I had it all planned out.  I was going to get my undergrad in theatre and then get a graduate degree in screenplay writing.  That was the plan from seventh grade and I never even thought of or considered anything else.

Things didn't work out.

And now the year is 2017.  I have nearly 10 years of working experience.  A degree in History Education at a 3.5 GPA, Dean's list honors all of my junior and senior years. 

I'm 32 years old and I have my choice between shitty jobs with shitty pay or "Come sell insurance for us!"

Oh, and before you tell me, I already know. I can also go into the military.   I actually did look into that about a year ago. I'm getting too old to begin with and secondly I have no interests. I don't think I'd fit in at all and I think I'd be seen as a burden/exile by my fellow comrades. If that's not enough. I spoke to an Air Force recruiter. Per her testimony going into the military wouldn't be much a help to me at all. Already existing loans aren't their area. Loans for future college plans are. Her words.)

But I digress, I'm going off on a tangent.

Back to the point.

I think I'd have been better off to not have gone to college at all.  Or to have gone to a community college and called it good. 

My Dad thinks I should have gone to college for something more, "practical"

Well would that have worked?  Could I have done that?

Maybe.

Film production?  It still sorta/kinda puts me in the realm of the entertainment world and while careers aren't flourishing they aren't exactly scarce either. 

Maybe instead of screenplay writing I should have thought more along the lines of creative writing?  Yeah, I'd still be in the same boat I'm in now huh?

Truth is nearly anything and everything I could have done, been good at, been happy doing doesn't fall under the "practical" umbrella.

And if it's my job to be practical then it ought to be everyone else's job to be practical too. My brain doesn't work in certain ways. I'm not a math and science guy.  I realize those jobs are lucrative and pay a lot of money. Get you a lot of respect and admiration from the community, but they're not for me.  An engineer who designs and builds bridges and interstates and skyscrapers I'm sure has an awesome job, as does the architect who helps him.  They're not jobs I could do.  So take it for what it is or be a pretentious pompous about it and say, "that's just cause he wouldn't try."  Either way, moving on.

Law? Could I have done law? I don't know.  Criminal justice has always fascinated me. I love watching television shows and movies about law enforcement.  My cousin Patrick is an officer and I have friends who are lawyers.  I don't know how it would have turned out, but that is a path I could have seen myself taking. I read a book while in school called, I CHOSE PRISON by James V Bennett. He said that if you went into law, regardless of the specifics you would always have a job.  He said that in 1970, but I imagine it still true today.

My mom thinks I should have gone to school for social work. She thinks I would have made a great counselor or social worker. After things fell apart at Northwestern College, she wanted me to go to William Penn and get my degree in Social work.  Maybe I should have. 

Journalism is another degree that always excited me. However as much as I've been used, abused, underappreciated and exploited in the world of amateur wrestling media, I'm not so sure that would have been a great idea either.  The pay always seems mediocre at best and you're often charging people, "too much" for your work, even if you do it for free.

Public Relations and Communications?  I worked in that field for three years and having a degree in it would have helped. Seems like an interesting enough field.  Maybe this would have been the answer?

Psychology would have been a lot of fun. It's neat to imagine myself like Dr. Fraser Crane from CHEERS.  I imagine though that while the four years would have been a treat to study that I'd most likely be in the same predicament I am in now.  Only I'd be able to come up with better comebacks and insults. Take deep, layered shots at those who tried to demean me.  I'm already pretty good at it. I suppose with a psychology degree, I'd be downright deadly. 

Computer science is the degree that lies right on the edge for me. There's math involved and science but, not hard math. Not the type of math that says, "Stephen I hate you and you forever shall known it!"  But good math.  Math that is my friend.  And the type of science that I think I could understand.  Science is always something I've appreciated, admired and loved in many ways.  Let like a Lisa Turtle to a Screech Powers or a Laura Winslow to a Steve Urkle, something that has always been repulsed by me and treated me with the fiercest rejection.


Could I have been practical?  Studied a practical major? Gotten a practical degree?  Gotten a practical job? Became a practical person?

No.

Hell right now as I sit here looking over all of the many majors offered at colleges and universities around the world, I find yet another one that fascinates me a great deal.

Zoology.  Now there's a major I think would have been a lot of fun.  Yet what the Hell does one do with a zoology degree?  Work as an intern at the Des Moines Zoo for nothing dollars and nothing cents an hour?

Ooh, how about Oceanography?  Sure as Hell would need to get out of Iowa to make use of that one, huh?  And maybe that's the issue.  Maybe staying in Iowa has been my downfall.  I don't know.

What I do know is that it is my turn on bottom....STILL.  And I do believe strongly that I'll have my day on top.  I still haven't given up on my dreams.  I'm still a writer.  I'm not a successful one yet, but I'm still a writer.  I still have hope. I still have faith. 

I'm only 32 after all as they say.  Whoever they is.

It Never Came To Fruition: 6 Feuds in WWE That Started But Never Finished

Bret Hart Vs Bad News Brown 

From his arrival in 1985 up until Wrestlemania IV in 1988, Bret "The Hitman" Hart was a heel in the World Wrestling Entertainment. That all changed during the opening Battle Royal when after seemingly wanting to share the prize money as co-winners, Bad News double crossed "The Hitman" hitting him with his signature Ghetto Blaster and then throwing him out of the ring. Hart came back with a vengeance hitting Bad News with a dropkick and destroying the trophy that had been awarded to him.

Seeing that this was step one of Hart's face turn, a prolific match between the two was in order. It wasn't that we didn't see matches between Hart and Brown, because we did. It's simply that they were forgettable, non hyped matches that never amounted to much.  Perhaps not big enough for a PPV, we deserved a promoted, hyped up, SATURDAY NIGHT'S MAIN EVENT semi-main event out of this match.

Why didn't we get one?

Two reasons.  Even though WWE was testing "The Hitman" out in singles competition, he was still in a tag team with Jim "The Anvil" Neidhart and the main focus was the tag team and their feuds and matches. Rather than use their main television shows and Pay-Per-Views for a singles match with Hart, they would rather use that exposure to get the team over.

The other major problem was with Brown.  Brown, who was at best as high end mid-carder during his time in WWE, always saw himself as the top heel in the company. While a good, solid worker, Brown thought of himself as the heel version of Hulk Hogan in popularity, drawing power and overall importance to the company. Thinking as highly of himself as he did, it was like pulling teeth getting Brown to do a clean job for Hogan.  If he wasn't winning the match, it was nine times out of ten going to end in a disqualification or a countout. Brown didn't do jobs and he certainly wasn't going to be Hart's first prolific win as a singles competitor. 

It's really a shame too, because the two could have had a great match. A match that signified itself as the start of Hart's initial rise to becoming one of the greatest WWE superstars of all time.  It probably would have helped Brown's career too.  Had Brown not been so stubborn, and more willing to help other guys get over, rather than always worrying about himself and the God like image he gave himself, WWE probably would have done more with him. Not sure if it would have led to any title reigns, world or intercontinental but it would have led to better PPV matches.

Billy Gunn Vs Bart Gunn 

The classic formula of former partners, be it best friends or brothers having their differences, where one betrays the other to lead to a feud has been done many times throughout the history of professional wrestling. The reason being, because the formula works.  Fans emotionally invest in the tag team, thus take the betrayal personally when it happens.

The Smoking Gunns were indisputably the most popular WWE Tag Team of the New Generation era. Perhaps Billy's heel turn would have been better suited if the team were faces during the time rather than heels, but their feud deserved a longer go and a better ending than what it received.

The teasers and previews up until their Saturday Morning Superstars bout were promising, but the match itself was lackluster. While it started out good, Bart dropped Billy across the top rope injuring him (Kayfabe). The referee stopped the match as Billy's wife, who was apparently going for a Golden Raspberry award ran into the ring and began screaming, "How could you do this? He's Your Brother!!"  Bart was left with an obvious concern on his face that he might have seriously injured Billy and we were thrown into a commercial break as medical help began to work on him.

What was going to happen? Was this going to lead to a scene where we saw Bart visit Billy in the hospital and the two would bury the hatchet and become a team again?  Was this going to lead to Billy vowing vengeance against Bart,  and a huge final confrontation at a PPV down the road?   What was going to happen?

Nothing.  That's what happened. Not a damn thing.  Billy came back to float around WWE wrestling as himself and Rockabilly before finding Road Dogg and forming what would be the Attitude Era's hottest tag team.  Bart who was a great talent, was misused and mistreated in a variety of different ways before finally being released and going to Japan where they appreciated the talent that he was.

WWE really dropped the ball on this one. I always thought and still think that somewhere along the line, Bart Gunn should have been a member of Degeneration X.  If they weren't going to go anywhere with the Gunn Vs Gunn feud, then turn the feud on its head and have a moment of redemption. At some point have Bart save Billy or Billy save Bart.  Have a significant moment where the two come together with the rest of DX, have Bart give the suck it sign and be a member. I think he would have been a nice addition to the group.

Tito Santana Vs Rick Martel 

Tito Santana accidentally hits Rick Martel with the Flying Forearm (or as Bobby Heenan would tell you, the Flying Jalapeno) during their Wrestlemania V match with The Brainbusters and Martel walks out on Santana. Post match interview, Martel calls Santana a loser, says he's sorry he ever associated with him and that he's lucky that all he did was walk away.  This is the beginning of a great feud.

We got matches between the two, but nothing prolific. Matter of fact, when the two did wrestle one another, it was treated as just another match on the card. It made little to no sense why they didn't get a SUMMERSLAM pay off or why they didn't feud throughout the year to have a huge pay off at Wrestlemania VI.

They proved that they could have a great match and tear the house down.  Fans were into their matches and years later, even during Tito's final year in the WWE with the "El Matador" gimmick they often threw him into the ring with Martel because the two worked so well together.

Why not give them a memorable, monumental match that they deserved?  I don't get that.  It would have made a lot more sense to have had Martel vs Santana at Wrestlemania VI than to have had Martel Vs Ko Ko B Ware and Santana vs The Barbarian.

Crush Vs Doink 

24 years later and I'm still pissed at WWE for dropping the ball on this one.  The feud started off great, with Doink giving Crush a concussion. Their Wrestlemania IX match was much like that of The Undertaker Vs The Giant Gonzalez, only Taker and Gonzalez got a SUMMERSLAM payoff and Crush and Doink didn't.

It would have been fine if Doink's victory over Crush was the end of it, and both went their separate ways right then and right there. Yet the feud continued to escalate, only to go no where.

The two met in a return match shortly after Wrestlemania with Crush winning via disqualification with Doink having another Doink show up so the two could beat the crap out of him.  This only led to fans wanting to see Crush get his revenge even more.

Then at King of The Ring, Crush had the intercontinental championship won against Shawn Michaels, only to have Doink come down to the ring and cost him the match.

We were lead to believe that there was going to be a huge match between these two.  A no disqualification, a steel cage match, something big and important to end the feud between the circus freak and the giant can of orange soda.

And what did we get? Another lackluster match that wasn't even televised everywhere, where Crush won via count out.

I don't know if their feud could have ended with a more anticlimactic finish than what it did.   We as fans deserved a lot more out of this one than what we received.

Ultimate Warrior Vs Jake Roberts 

This one actually wasn't the fault of WWE and poor booking decisions as were the previous four entries. This one was the sole fault of The Ultimate Warrior and his choice to leave the WWE before this feud came to fruition.

Jake Roberts who could easily draw money as a face on Monday, a heel on Tuesday, and then again as a face on Wednesday, had recently turned heel by betraying the Ultimate Warrior and leading him into a trap where he was bitten on the face by a venomous Cobra. The feud was set in place, for Warrior to find his Gods, search deep within himself and find the power to overcome the evils of Jake the Snake.

Instead, Warrior found himself in financial disputes with the WWE and left Roberts hanging.  Perhaps for the best because this lead to the WWE having to come up with new ideas, and two of the best ideas WWE had during that time were then put into place.

First and foremost we ended up getting an Undertaker face turn, which wasn't only red hot in 1992, it was one of the best creative decisions WWE ever made.  Secondly, it got Randy Savage out of retirement and back into the ring, which lead to three outstanding matches between Savage and Roberts.

Nevertheless though, it would have been fun to have seen the match that never was between Roberts and Warrior. It's fairly predictable that Roberts would have nailed the DDT, only to have Warrior popped right back up, clothesline him 15 times, hit a flying tackle, gorilla press him over his head and then big splash him for the 1-2-3. It's not like we would have seen anything new, but some songs no matter how many times we hear them, we still like to listen to them again.

Shawn Michaels Vs Marty Jannetty 

Everyone and their dog, whether they were their to witness it when it happened, or they know because everyone else talks about it, knows about the Barber Shop incident where Shawn Michaels threw his former partner and ex-best friend Marty Jannetty through the glass window.  This began a feud that could have drawn money and been the main event at every PPV throughout the year.

And its not that it didn't happen, because it did.  It's simply that it wasn't done right and it wasn't done at the right places.  Marty and Shawn put on the most entertaining matches. Even the experts who vote, awarded their Monday Night Raw match where Jannetty defeated Michaels for the intercontinental championship as the 1993 match of the year.

Every match they had during that time was a 6 out of 5 star match, and yes that was written on purpose. Their matches were that good.  Their matches on Monday Night Raw, their Royal Rumble match, and their cage match.  All of them were marquee, could have easily been the main event matches.

To know that we never ended up getting an ultimate payoff between the two for inexcusable reasons is something that bugs me 25 years later and it'll bug me 25 years after this.

A part of the problem was Jannetty himself and the demons he faced with drugs, alcohol and women.  If only he could have controlled these demons, and been more focused he could have taken the WWE by storm and proved he was every bit as good as Michaels if not better.

Another huge wrench in the operation was the Charles Austin incident where Jannetty accidentally broke Austin's neck during a match that ended up seeing Austin awarded $27 million in a lawsuit against the WWE.

Lastly, this feud never came to fruition because of the shady, snide and selfish decisions of an egotistical and narcissistic Shawn Michaels. Shawn sabotaged and ruined a lot of would be great opportunities and moments for many wrestlers throughout his days in WWE, and he did so here in what could have been the hottest thing of the early-mid 90's.

If only Shawn Michaels gave a damn about something other than himself during this time, both he and Jannetty would have torn the house down in the months and even years to come.

It's hard to look back on the career of Marty Jannetty and to know where it ended up. Some of it his fault, some of it not.

Wrestlemania VIII, Summerslam 93, something somewhere.

Instead both moved on to do their own thing.  Michaels was given an awesome match with Mr. Perfect that ended in a countout and Jannetty did a squash match job for Ludvig Borga.

And I don't know if anything in professional wrestling, storyline wise with exception to maybe what Shawn did the the British Bulldog at One Night Only, has bothered me more.

Top 10 Tag Team Specialists of all time.

There are an ample amount of greatest professional wrestlers of all time lists. Whether it be by generation, federation, or an overall evaluation of professional wrestling as a whole, the lists of greatest singles competitors is plentiful. Nearly every professional wrestling website has made one, if not more, and nearly every fan has at least one of their own.


The same is true for the greatest tag teams in professional wrestling. Teams like The Road Warriors/Legion of Doom, Demolition, The Hart Foundation and Harlem Heat often make the list.

Yet what about the professional wrestlers who as individuals were phenomenal tag team specialist? Workers who could be pared with about anybody and make the team work. Make the team get over? Who are these wrestlers?

This list isn't a compilation of the greatest tag teams of all time, but rather a list of the greatest tag team individuals of all time. Individuals who specialized in tag team wrestling and here they are.

10. Mr. Fuji 

The devious one may be remembered most for his time as one of the greatest heel managers of all time, but his in ring work, especially as a tag team specialist should be noted as well. While he was never much of a singles wrestler, he shined in the tag team ranks. Throughout various independents in the 60's and 70's Fuji held a numerous amount of tag team championships with many wrestlers. His most accomplished credentials in the WWE were during the times he teamed with Professor Tanaka and with Mr. Saito, where between the two Fuji held the WWE tag team titles on five occasions.

9. Kane 

You may not think of Kane as a tag team specialist when you first give his illustrious and storied career thought. You should. While Kane accomplished many things as a singles wrestler, his best moments were when he was in a team. Even before he became the big red machine, the talents and skills that eventually led him to a WWE contract were most prevalent during his tag team days with Al Snow in Smokey Mountain. While in WWE they put Kane in every makeshift tag team combination possible and there was only one that didn't work.  The New Razor and New Diesel tag didn't get over, but every other one did.  Kane was teamed with Mankind, X-Pac, The Undertaker, The Hurricane, RVD and Daniel Bryan. Each team was so popular that they all held the tag titles at least once for Kane to end his professional wrestling career as an 11 time co-holder of the WWE tag team championship.

8. Ron Simmons 

Ron Simmons will forever be cemented in history as the first black champion of a major American promotion. While his WCW world's title is epic and should be remembered for the historical monument that it is, it should also be noted in how good of a tag team wrestler Ron Simmons was. Butch Reed in many ways is one of the best wrestlers to never hold a WWE belt, and if it weren't for Simmons he never would have held a WCW title either.  While in WWE he helped to propel JBL from a mid-carder into one of their top talents.  While JBL was always a good solid worker, it wasn't until he teamed with Ron Simmons winning three tag team championships, that he really began to shine.

7. Earthquake 

One of the most underrated superstars of all time, Earthquake is also severely underrated as a tag team specialist. His chemistry and timing in the ring with Dino Bravo worked well enough to where the two could have been one of the hottest heel teams in the WWE. Yet the late 80's, with every team looking the same in look and stature, the makeshift team didn't fit in.  Years later, it seemed the WWE came to the realization of how good of a tag team wrestler Earthquake was as they teamed him with Typhoon to form the Natural Disasters. While the team was over as both faces and heels, a short run with the tag team titles is all they would get. After returning to the WWE after a long absence, Quake continued to show his expertise in tag team wrestling when as one fourth of the Oddities he was easily the most popular and beloved one.

6. Mike Rotunda 

Rotunda is remembered in the professional wrestling world for two reasons. The first is having the most ridiculous gimmicks. The second is for being one of the greatest tag team wrestlers of all time.  While Rotunda never did much as a singles competitor, he flourished in the teams. During his time in the NWA, he shined brightest with Steve Williams as a member of The Varsity Club. In the WWE he held the tag team championships on five occasions, twice with Barry Windham as one half of the U.S. Express and three times with Ted Dibiase as Money Inc.

5. The Barbarian 

It's not often that you can look back on the glory years of both WWE and WCW and find where both companies dropped the ball on an idea, but in the case of the Barbarian, they both did it twice. As to his runs with the Warlord as the Powers of Pain in WWE and as the Super Assassins in WCW, the explanation as to why they weren't pushed harder is quite weak. They were seen as Road Warrior rip offs and with Demolition already in the WWE with a similar gimmick, they were quickly disbanded and sent their separate ways as singles competitors.  Neither the Warlord or the Barbarian ever did as well separately as they did when teaming.

The same can be said for the Barbarian's team with Haku. Why it wasn't better utilized in WWE, is once again explained in the fact that with few exceptions McMahon didn't want makeshift tag teams. Why they weren't better used in WCW, is a real mystery.  Labeled The Faces of Fear, they could have easily boosted WCW's tag team scene to new heights if they had been used properly as the great heel team they were.

4. Billy Gunn 

Billy Gunn spent eight years swimming around the independents as a singles wrestler that nobody knew or cared about. Trying his luck as a tag team wrestler, it didn't take long before Billy Gunn was a household name. While Gunn has had some respectable success in singles competition, it pales in comparison to what he did as a tag team wrestler.  While with Bart Gunn as the Smoking Gunns, he held the WWE tag team championship on two occasions as one of the New Generation Era's most popular teams. After splitting up with Bart, WWE tried Billy Gunn as a singles competitor in a series of gimmicks that were not getting over with the fans. It seemed that Gunn's career was on a fast track to nowhere.

Then out of no where Gunn was teamed with The Road Dogg Jesse James and if Brian James is an honest person, then he knows he owes every ounce of gratitude for why he's the most well known and famous of his family to Billy Gunn. Not only were the two the hottest tag team in the WWE during the Attitude Era, they helped to define it.

Why WWE decided to once again split them up and try Gunn out as a singles competitor is beyond comprehension.  Again, this time as Mr. Ass and then as The One, Billy Gunn as a singles wrestler was nothing compared to him as a tag.

WWE then teamed Gunn with Chuck Palumbo in a controversial homosexual gimmick that despite not being anywhere near as popular as The New Age Outlaw, the team still got over.  Trying a few other times to get over on their own, both Gunn and Road Dogg realized that they're best when together and the two reunited. To this day, they'll still a draw wherever they go.

3. Paul Roma 

Much like Earthquake, Paul Roma is an underrated and underappreciated talent in the world of professional wrestling. While a strong and solid singles competitor, it was in the tag team division that Roma showed off how good of a worker he really was. Even when his partner didn't want the team to work, which was the case with both Jim Powers in the WWE as The Young Stallions and with Arn Anderson in WCW, Roma was still able to put aside personal differences and make the team get over.

When you put him with someone who wanted to make the team work, few teams were any better.  With Hercules in the WWE, known as Power and Glory, the two are easily one of the top three teams ever in the history of the company to not hold the tag team championship. They were red hot as heels and could have easily feuded with any team drawing all sorts of money all over the country.  Yet, they weren't used to their full potential and it was most likely due to the fact that McMahon had recently obtained the Road Warriors (Legion of Doom) and he didn't want any of their competition to look as big and bad as they were. According to Roma in a shoot interview, their squash match at Wrestlemania VII had more to do with both he and Hercules being injured, but one still can't help but think it was McMahon's way of showing just how superior LOD was to other teams.

In WCW, Ric Flair likes to claim that Roma was the worst thing to happen to the Four Horsemen.  Maybe so, but without any dispute whatsoever, Paul Roma was the best thing to ever happen to Paul Orndorff. After a career that was cut short in WWE, it seemed that Orndorff was near the end of his run on top as his WCW television title reign came to an end.  He was 44 years old, and some would say too old to accomplish much more as a professional wrestler. If it hadn't been for teaming with Paul Roma, that may have been true.

Known as Pretty Wonderful, Roma and Orndorff were one of the best WCW tag teams of all time, perhaps only second or third to Harlem Heat and The Outsiders. The two would hold the tag team titles on two occasions.

2. Owen Hart 

There's nothing Owen Hart couldn't do. No matter what situation you put him in, he could do it and make it work. Tag Team wrestling was no exception.  While some of the tag teams he was in, worked better than others, all of them illustrated the tag team specialist that Hart was.  While with Neidhart, Hart showed his brilliance for tag team maneuvers, that would have also been shown with Koko B Ware if it weren't for McMahon insisting that they job to every tag team on the planet.  His team with brother Bret would have worked if it hadn't been for the fact that Bret was already established as WWE's top singles wrestlers.

When he was teamed with Yokozuna, it at first appeared like an odd combination, but the two not only worked, they won the tag team championship on their first night together!  Owen's most successful run in the tag team division though was with brother-in-law The British Bulldog, where the two won the tag team titles from The Smoking Gunns.  While not as strong of a tag team as he was with the Bulldog, Hart would also win the tag team titles with Jeff Jarrett before a tragic accident ended his life in May of 1999.  Some wonder if Hart had lived if he would have eventually held the WWE world's title. He was certainly good enough to have. No doubt though, that as good as he was as a a tag team wrestler, that at least a couple more reigns as champion would have been added to his list of impressive credentials.

1. Marcus Bagwell 

When it comes to tag team wrestling, there is no name in professional wrestling that says, "tag team" better than Marcus Bagwell.  Regardless of how 2 Cold Scorpio may feel about Bagwell in real life, he should take a step back and realize that the world may not even know or care who he is if it wasn't for Bagwell.  The same can be said about Scotty Riggs.  Marcus Bagwell is who got both of them over.

Hell the same can even be said about Scott Norton, at least for his run in the United States. As a singles competitor he was nothing special and most don't even recall his team with Ice Train.  Yet many do remember his NWO run, in particularly as a member of Vicious and Delicious with Bagwell.

The Patriot was a strong singles wrestler, one who helped the GWF during their glory years, and one who if it weren't for injuries, personal problems and a difference of opinion would have been a top draw in the WWE.  Even so, his best days in the business were with Bagwell as one half of Stars and Stripes, who held the WCW tag team titles on two occasions.

His teams with Shane Douglas and Lex Luger weren't quite as good as ones prior, but even they showcased why Marcus Bagwell is the greatest tag team wrestler of all time.  While he struggled when he was on his own, once in a tag team he excelled to every level.  He got himself over, the team over and his partner over and that's why nearly ever tag team he was ever in worked as well as it did.
There were certainly better tag teams. You can put every team that Bagwell was ever in together, and even combined, they couldn't match the Road Warriors or Demolition or the Rockers.  Yet, looking at it strictly from an individual as a tag team specialist, no one can touch Bagwell. He was the greatest.

Is Hollywood About to Ruled by a King? In particularly A Stephen King?

It's been a mere matter of days and already Andy Muschietti's adaptation of Stephen King's 1986 best selling novel  IT has already shattered a numerous amount of records. Having already made $51 million dollars, IT has set a record for the biggest opening ever for a horror film. It is also the biggest opener ever in the beginning of September.  If that isn't enough IT has also surpassed Deadpool as being the biggest Friday ever for an R rated film.  Seeing that Paranormal Activity currently holds the record for the biggest overall weekend for a horror film ever at $52.6 million dollars, look for the papers to read that IT tore that record to shreds early Monday morning.


With all of these records being broken and set, it can't help but make one wonder if we're in for an era of Stephen King remakes. The truest fact about Hollywood is that its bottom line is the almighty dollar and what ever makes the most Benjamin's is what we'll see the most of on the silver screen. If Stephen King adaptations, remakes and reimaginings are what Hollywood thinks we the paying public want to see, then Stephen King is what we're going to get.

STAND BY ME, THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION, THE GREEN MILE and THE MIST are all King adaptations that most love and feel were made right the first time.  Yet for the majority of King adaptations the general consensus is that they all had an excellent premise that failed to deliver in execution. Fans look back on these films and imagine with great enthusiasm what they could have been but recollect with bitterness as to what they actually were. With the success of IT we could be in for a feast of King movies so rich in quality and value that by the time we're done we're stuffed with satisfaction and delight.

We already know that IT: Chapter Two is in our future. It has also been confirmed that PET SEMATARY has been confirmed for a reimagining as well. What other King adaptations would we like to see?

MISERY

Although Kathy Bates gave both an Academy Award and Golden Globe winning performance as Anne Wilkes, the rest of the film falls a bit flat. Not that it is a bad film, because it isn't. It simply could be better. Like Tim Curry as Pennywise the Dancing Clown, topping Bates or even coming close to her will be to the level of difficulty a nose-hair below impossible. Yet like Bill Skarsgard, whoever the actress is that would get the part, would bring it to life in her own unique way. Already one of King's personal favorites, a remake could be even better.

THE TOMMYKNOCKERS

Much like the 1990 made for television miniseries of IT, the 1993 made for television miniseries of THE TOMMYKNOCKERS suffers from the same problems. The films strengths are in its story, and strong performances of Jimmy Smits, E.G. Marshall, John Astin, Robert Carradine and Joanna Cassidy. Yet being made for television meant a smaller budget for special effects, thus forcing for more exposition than visual and an unbalanced hinge between drama and horror that left viewers top heavy on the drama and rather empty handed on the horror.

A remake here could take an already good adaptation and propel it to the same heights as the first chapter of the reimagining of IT.  A bigger budget for special effects and the freedom of an R rated film could balance the level of horror and drama to give us the experience that the story was meant to be.

MAXIMUM OVERDRIVE/TRUCKS

There have already been two versions of Stephen King's TRUCKS.  First 1986's MAXIMUM OVERDRIVE and then 1997's made for television TRUCKS. Both films had their strengths but were mediocre in their own ways. Whereas MAXIMUM OVERDRIVE was over the top, silly and over-dramatic, TRUCKS is the polar opposite in being too serious, too mundane and having serious need for comic relief.  A happy medium between the two King variations would most likely result in a fun, successful box office hit.

SILVER BULLET

Even back in 1985, critic Felix Vasquez Jr referred to SILVER BULLET 's visual effects as outdated and critic Scott Weinberg thought the film while not bad seemed more like an after school special for teenagers than it did a horror film that belonged in theaters. Looking at it 32 years later, the special effects are quite silly and Nickelodeon's ARE YOU AFRAID OF THE DARK produced more terrifying episodes.

This is a story that has great potential to be a great film and it would benefit from a remake. Better writing, mixed with better special effects could make for a mesmerizing story full of horror, excitement and heart that the 1985 film lacked.

CUJO 

This 1983 film adaptation of King's 1981 lacked the heart and soul of the novel. Whereas other King adaptations suffer from being heavy on the drama and light on the horror, this film did the opposite. It focused so strongly on making us afraid of a rabid St. Bernard that it forgets to pull us in with the mesmerizing and touching effect of King's story.  With greater focus on Cujo being a loyal, protective and loving dog who is driven crazy by the rabies, the audience could connect better with the story, thus leaving the theater with a mixture of lasting emotions, rather than simply feeling frightened for a few moments. Adding a perspective of the dog, as does the novel, to where when he is killing a human being, he believes he is killing the bat who gave him rabies, would add even greater effect.  This rather forgetful film could with the right writing and directing be one of King's best adaptations yet.

THE LANGOLIERS

This film had it all. It was written well, it was directed well, and it had an all star cast of well known and beloved actors. The mystery and suspense kept audiences glued to the screen for three hours in anticipation to see what happens. Then in a matter of minutes, it is all ruined by the most anti-climatic ending that a King adaptation has ever seen. (Some may argue that the giant spider in the second half of IT's 1990 miniseries was worse.)

It is sad that a rather good film is ruined by such a wretched ending. Poor special effects should not have that much emphasis on a film's reception, but this one did. A remake could easily fix that problem as well as condense the story down a bit to have a faster pace and a bit more energy along with its story.

CAT'S EYE 

Perhaps the film that could benefit the most from a remake/reimagining is 1985's CAT'S EYE which is essentially three stories meshed into one for the film. For those familiar with the film, there is little argument that the third story of the traveling cat is the most compelling. A remake, at least in the opinion of this blogger would be better suited to omit the first two stories altogether to give a stronger build and focus to the third. 85.5 million cats owned in the United States compared to 78 million owned dogs, gives testimony that cat lovers would flock to the theaters to see the one story of an heroic cat in the sea of what has been heroic dog movies.


Will King soon rule Hollywood with a series of remakes and reimaginings?  With the success of IT, the possibility is strong.

How I became The Amateur Wrestling Enthusiast I am Today.

Talking with another wrestling fan the other night, I was asked how and when I became the amateur wrestling enthusiast that I am.  Well, to answer that question I think it is a fairly simple, straight forward answer.

I started wrestling when I was 7 years old. Around this time I attended my first collegiate dual meet, which happened to be at the University of Iowa.  For the longest time, from about 1991-1999, I only followed Iowa wrestling.

Then in 1998, my Dad played slow-pitch softball with a guy by the name of Benjie Winegarden who had wrestled for Waldorf College and taken an 8th place All American finish at the NJCAA wrestling championships.  He was transferring to Iowa State University, where he was going to walk onto the team at 141 lbs.

The following season, I got to know Iowa State wrestling pretty well. Benjie got me signed t-shirts, posters and even brought me in to meet the team a couple of times. It was a very neat experience.

He then got my Dad and I tickets to the 1999 BIG 12 Championships.

It was a blast. We sat right down in front with a huge group of Cyclone fans.  There was so much good wrestling. My dad knew a few of the other wrestlers from other teams, like Dave Kjelgaard of Oklahoma, but other than that we only knew the Iowa State wrestlers.

I didn't like this. I wanted to know who these other kids from other schools were. And that's really when it all began.

I began studying the sport like crazy. Come 2000-2001 I wanted to know as much about Division I wrestling as I could.  And I've been like that ever since.

Winegarden unfortunately finished one match shy of Qualifying, taking 4th place.  I want to say he sat out the 1999-2000 season and then was beat out for the varsity position by Aaron Holker the eventual 2002 NCAA champion the following year.  Not 100% positive about that.

Anyway, I suppose it all began there.  And I have Winegarden to thank for making a College wrestling fan out of me.

Why Horror Often Fails

There are two truths about Horror films that cannot be disputed. They can be really good and they can be really bad. When done right a horror film can be a fun, exciting and rewarding experiences for its viewer. A film that combines the best elements of drama, action and suspense wrapped up into an intriguing thriller. Horror can be mesmerizing and captivating. It at times can even be the best cinema has to offer.

It can also be the worst cinema has to offer. When done wrong, horror films can be as bad as it gets. They can be an awful, miserable and even painful experience. Horror at times can SUCK.

If you give horror a fair shake, you'll most likely come across films that you love and ones that you hate, with a bunch of ones in between. As an avid fan of horror and furthermore a passionate, staunch defender of horror it isn't easy for me to admit this. The bad horror films far outnumber the good ones. It's easier to find ten horrible horror films than it is to find one good one. If you get on Netflix and search for one, you'll sift through dozens upon dozens of garbage before you run across a good one. It wasn't any different during the days of rentals either. If there were fifty movies to choose from in the horror section, chances are the bad ones outnumbered the good ones.

Why is this? Why are the really good horror movies hard to find? Why are the shitty ones a dime a dozen?

Why do so many horror movies fail?

I've given this a lot of thought. I realize that not everyone has the same views as I do but I also see a lot of similarities in the horror films that are popular and beloved verses the ones that people seem to loathe. I do believe that the horror films that fit nice and neat into the "suck" category usually have at least one of the, if not a combination of the, if not all of the problems listed below.

Uninteresting Protagonist(s)

One of the reasons so many horror films fail is because writers, directors and producers fail to realize that audiences need interesting protagonist as much as they do interesting antagonist. They make the fatal mistake of thinking that as long as the killer is interesting, then nothing else is needed.

Have you ever came across a dead animal in the road? How do you feel when you see a raccoon or a snake? How do you feel when you see a dog or a cat? Now you may be the exception, but most people are going to feel differently seeing a dead dog in the road than they are a dead raccoon. The reason why is because we as human beings have a connection with dogs. We see them as our pets. Our friends. For many of us, dogs are our family, beloved more than our human relatives. It hurts to see a dog the road because we make the connotation that someone somewhere loved that dog and someone somewhere is going to be heartbroken and depressed to learn about his/her passing. While the loss of life of the raccoon may also be sad to us, we don't care anywhere near as much about it as we do the dog, because we don't have an emotional investment in the raccoon.

Protagonist in horror films are no different. What makes scenes in a horror film frightening to us? What makes them thrilling? Why do we care about what happens? Or why do we not care?

Why when watching John Carpenter's HALLOWEEN for the first time were you on the edge of your seat when Michael Myers was after Laurie Strode? Why did the sense of urgency have you glued to the screen in anticipation of what would happen next? Yet when watching HALLOWEEN RESURRECTION with Michael Myers killing a bunch of random teenagers, you found yourself bored and apathetic to the fates they faced.  Why is that?

The answer is simple. Laurie Strode is a well written, compelling and interesting character. As was Dr. Sam Loomis. Those two characters, the protagonists of the film had every bit as much to do with why John Carpenter's HALLOWEEN was a success as did the antagonist Michael Myers.

You'll find this to be true with a lot of horror films. Chucky had Andy Barclay in CHILD'S PLAY. Freddy Kruger had Nancy in A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. If we invest in and care about these characters, then we have an emotional response to the danger they are in. We empathize with the situation and fear the consequences that could result.

Moustapha Akkad, producer of the original eight HALLOWEEN films, was once asked why he felt HALLOWEEN V: THE REVENGE OF MICHAEL MYERS was one of the most hated of the franchise. He said he felt it was because the character Rachel had been killed off early in the film. He's right. She was an interesting character, the heroine who helped Dr. Loomis to stop Michael Myers in the previous film. Killing her off and replacing her with Tina, who wasn't at all interesting, took the steam out of the story. Audiences were disappointed and frustrated.

Horror needs good protagonist(s) as much as it needs good antagonist(s). Jesus needs his Satan. Satan needs his Jesus. It's what makes the whole thing engaging.

SACRIFICING STORY FOR TWIST

A twist in a horror film can make it or break it. THE SIXTH SENSE had such a clever twist, that helped the film to be immensely successful that here we are nearly twenty years later and movies are still trying to capitalize on the idea by throwing twists into their films left and right. Only making a twist work is a very difficult task. Even M. Night Shyamalan, who wrote and directed THE SIXTH SENSE has failed in trying to duplicate the success of his 1999 smash hit.

Twists generally have one of two problems.

A - They are way too revealing and easy to figure out. You didn't even have to be looking for a clue in Shyamaln's THE VILLAGE to figure out the ending five minutes into the film. While it took a little longer, you'd have had to have been sleeping through THE HAPPENING to not know how it was going to end. Both film's might have been better and saved from criticism if they had concentrated on making their story stronger, than to have worried so much about trying to shock their audience with a twist.

B - The twist is nonsensical and doesn't make any sense. This seems like it should be common sense but unfortunately it isn't always. The twist in a film needs to add up and be plausible. Furthermore there should be hints along the course of the story, to where when the truth is revealed at the story's conclusion, audience members slap themselves in the head for not realizing it all along. There is nothing clever or neat or shocking about an ending that makes no sense. HIGH TENSION for example has a twist that fails in a multitude of ways. If you go back and watch the film, the revelation makes no sense. There is no way, given the evidence that the film provides that anyone could have logically came to that conclusion. A film's twist cannot contradict the story. If it does, even if the rest of the film works, the nonsensical ending will ruin the experience.


And there are other reasons horror movies fail. More so on the technical and budgetary end of things. Horror films are usually cheap in comparison to other films to produce. Therefore the directing, the writing and the acting may suffer. The cliched saying, "You get what you pay for" does sometimes ring true in the world of cinema.

Yet I've found, even with B films, films with an extremely low budget if they avoid the two cardinal mistakes I've defined above, they are in the very least watchable, if not at least on some level good.

Horror films both good and bad will continue to be made. I've sat through enough shit in the past couple of years with modern day horror films that I could stand to see some more good ones. Maybe one day I'll meet one of my dreams face to face and with me as the screenplay writer and Jason Janes at the director, we'll get to make our own horror film.

My Top 10 Least Favorite Sequels

10. Halloween H20

I like the movie. I OWN the movie. I watch the movie a lot. On the surface it may not make much sense why I would would have it on my "least favorite" sequel list. Looking at it strictly as a sequel to Halloween II, it holds up incredibly well. Yet it blatantly ignored Halloween 4, Halloween 5 and Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers and this is where I have a problem with it. Yes Halloween 4 was mediocre at best, Halloween 5 is an atrocity of a film and Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers is perhaps the greatest example of a film with incredible promise and potential that was ruined in execution by a dimwit director.

The fact of the matter is, Donald Pleasence aka Dr. Sam Loomis was a huge part of the Halloween series. And I feel that Halloween: H20 was a slap in the face to a man who had poured so much of himself into the series. Jamie Lee Curtis had been asked to be in other Halloween films in the past and she had always turned down the role, stating that she felt that her Halloween days were behind her and she had moved on to bigger and better things.  Donald Pleasence died in early February of 1995, and it was announced in December of 95 that there was going to be a new Halloween film and JLC would be returning. Suddenly her attitude was that Halloween made her a household name and she felt that she owed it to her fans to come back and do one last sequel.  That has always seemed very coincidental to me. The argument I hear a lot is that if Pleasence were still alive he would have been in H20, but I've never bought it. I do not think JLC would have been in a Halloween sequel, as long as she had to share the spotlight with Pleasence. The small tribute to Pleasence's famous monologue frin Halloween was better than nothing I suppose, but I still feel more could have been included. Donald Pleasence deserved a high prolific, positive send off and this is a reminder that he didn't get one.  And for JLC to say that she is glad she had nothing to do with the crappy "4-6" sequels that came after Halloween II,....news flash!! Halloween Ressurection that she did take part in was way worse than Halloween 4 and Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers and only slightly more watchable than Halloween 5. 

9. Halloween III: Season of the Witch

It's really a shame that Halloween III: Season of the Witch is considered to be a sequel, because as a standalone film, it is actually pretty good. Take out the Halloween III part of the title and this film would easily be remembered as a solid 80's horror flick. Yet because it has Halloween III in the title, it is one of the most hated sequels in this modern history of film, let alone horror. Like everyone else who fell in love with the Michael Myers story of Halloween and Halloween II,  I was excited to see where the story was going to go next. Only Halloween III: Season of the Witch didn't have Michael Myers in it. It didn't even take place in Haddonfield, Illinois. It was a brand new story, with brand new characters and no one new what to make of it. It bombed at the box office and put John Carpenter into a bitter mood.

I can appreciate and understand what Carpenter was going for here. His goal was to make the Halloween series into an anthology series, where each year a new scary story would be released on or around Halloween with the title being Halloween (Subtitle).  It's a unique and interesting idea and it would have been interesting to have seen all the different films that would have been made and how long it would have lasted until it came to an end.

I feel Carpenter's main flaw in executing this idea was by having a direct follow up to Halloween that continued the Michael Myers story. I think if there was no Halloween II (which happens to be one of my favorite sequels of all time) that fans, including myself would have been more open and accepting of a new story.

Things were much different in the late 70's and early 80's than they are today, but I can't help but think Carpenter's vision would work in today's "information per second" age. If people were prepared and set up for an anthology series, I think it could work.  Nevertheless Halloween III: Season of the Witch is a good standalone film, and one of the worst sequels of all time....in my opinion.

8. Bride of Chucky

If you can't tell by now, continuity is a huge thing with me. Many people think that my only biff with Bride of Chucky  is that it doesn't have Andy Barclay in it. And yes, I was disappointed that Barclay was not in the film, but there was more to it than that.  For one, I enjoyed the humor of the first three, and found the humor of Bride of Chucky to be more raunchy, cliched and what I like to call "junior high funny." I also didn't understand how the first couple of stories took place in Chicago, with Chucky's only way of getting out of the Good Guy Doll body was to perform the voodoo speech on the first person he revealed his true self to.....to now all of a sudden we're in New Jersey and he has to get an amulet that was never mentioned that he was buried with. Again continuity is a big thing with me.

If I separate Bride of Chucky from the other three films, I can sit down and enjoy it. I'll never find Jade or Jesse to be as interesting as Andy Barclay or even Nica Pierce, but they aren't as annoying and dull as I one time thought them as. I also find things about Bride of Chucky  that I really appreciate. For one, it was rewarding to get to see John Ritter in a role where he got to play a very unlikable antagonist. Being so used to seeing him as the "Heya Champ", "You bet sport" dad-like hero, it was fascinating to see him playing such an unlikable jerk.

Bride of Chucky led into Seed of Chucky which I couldn't even get all the way through. I was much happier to get Curse of Chucky which I thought was a pretty damn good sequel and I cannot wait until Cult of Chucky comes out! I haven't been this excited for a sequel in years!

7. Beverly Hills Cop 3

I love the first two Beverly Hills Cop movies but the third installment did not do it for me. While it has an interesting premise, it failed to execute. For one, the character of Axel Foley seems to be much different in this installment than he was in the previous two films. Whereas he was smooth, cool and collected in I and II, making calculated, intelligent moves, in III he is off the wall, crazy and borderline dumb at times. I'm not sure whether this falls on bad writing on the part of the screenwriter, bad direction from the director or on the shoulders of Eddie Murphy himself. The usually energetic and witty Murphy seemed tired and lackadaisical. Apathetic compared to how he had been the first two films.

I also found the character of Jon Flint (Hector Elizondo) to be dull and boring compared to that of Sgt. Taggart (John Ashton). I also feel that the film was not edited well because there are scenes that suggest and even imply that Flint is a dirty cop on the side of the criminals, and yet at the end he ends up being a good guy.

The first two films were fun, well written and well acted. This one....wasn't. I think Murphy feels the same way as does Judge Reinhold, that the third film wasn't good and the BHC series needs a better send off. Here's to Beverly Hills Cop IV, if it is ever made being the awesome thrill ride that I and II were and being as far away from III as possible.

6. Hannibal

I love Silence of the Lambs. I love Red Dragon too. I own both and I've sat down and watched both on several occasions. I saw Hannibal once and I don't care to ever see it again. Whereas the other two films in the series are mesmerizing, psychological thrillers this film seems nothing more than an attempt to gross out its audience.

Along with the disgusting factor, I also felt the film had Dr. Lector rely on luck and circumstance much more than he did his uncanny ability to outsmart like he did in the other two films. I didn't as much have a problem with Hannibal getting away as much as I did how he got away. In Silence of the Lambs, his escape is extraordinarily clever. In Red Dragon, even though it didn't work, his plan to upend Will Graham was still quite clever. In Hannibal, Clarice comes to his rescue and then in a scene that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever the butler pushes the disfigured man into the pig pen to be eaten alive. That scene alone, while not the only thing wrong with this movie, ruins it for me. There was no logical reason for him to do that. None whatsoever.

I do not like this film.

5. Superman IV: The Quest for Peace

A lot of people like to make the claim that Superman III is just as bad as IV, but it is not even comparable. IV is extremely bad. The story is bad. The acting is bad. The directing is bad. The special effects people should be drug out into the street and shot. This film lacks feeling, emotion, and any sense of life. Knock III till the cows come home if you wish, but at least it had some substance. I was thinking that the return of Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor would bring life back into the series, but it didn't. Whereas sidekick Otis was comic relief, Luthor's nephew Lenny (Jon Cryer) was annoying. Nuclear Man was painful to watch as well. The scene where Lacy is flown into space and she breathes and moves about normally bothered me too. Even III wouldn't have done anything that stupid.

Margot Kidder's and Mark McClure's involvement in the film comes off as obligated, rushed and insincere. The rekindling of Lois's and Clark's relationship was lit on a wick with no wax. It just wasn't there.

I pull this movie off the shelf every now and again to try and see if there is anything in it that can be its redeeming quality, its saving grace. Unfortunately all I see to do is find more wrong with it each time I watch it.

4. Bloodsport 2: The Next Kumite

 This film is bad. Bad.  How in the Hell there were two more sequels after this one, I don't know. The direct to video B films couldn't have made much, if any money. Bloodsport is certainly no masterpiece of a movie. The acting is pretty awful and the film can picked apart for its flaws, but compared to this rubbish, it is a damned work of art.

My biggest problem with Bloodsport 2: The Next Kumite is that they completely changed the character of Ray Jackson. Why!?!!? Donald Gibb returned for the role of Jackson, why would you make the character completely different in part two than he was in part 1? Why!!?!? WHY!?!?!?!?!?!?!? In part one he was a big, burly man with an outer tough man image and an interior of a good guy with a big heart and a genuine care for his friends. In part 2, he's just an asshole. Nothing likable about him at all and I don't get why they took what could have been the film's saving grace and ruined it.

3. Karate Kid III

This film really, really ticks me off. I mean REALLY ticks me off. I realize that Karate Kid II wasn't exactly Shakespeare but it at least made a decent attempt to follow up the gem that was The Karate Kid.  I called Halloween H20 a slap in the face to Donald Pleasence. Well this film, was a kick in the nuts to The Karate Kid and Karate Kid II. 

The main problem with this film is continuity. Mr. Miyagi had spent a significant amount of time working with Daniel, teaching him not only about Karate but about life. Preparing him physically and mentally, as well as emotionally for life's challenges in the first two films. We watched as Daniel grew and progressed from Miyagi's guidance. Now all of a sudden in III, Daniel has seemingly forgotten everything that Miyagi has taught him. He's regressed into a whiny, scared and helpless pathetic little punk. And there is no reason or explanation for it.

He gets off a plane after fighting an extremely skilled Chozen in a death match in Okinawa to suddenly be scared to death by local tournament champion Mike Barnes? He can put on a decent fight, even defeat Chozen, but he can't even get a single hit in on Mike Barnes? This completely undermines the entire story of part II.

I'm asked when complaining about this film if there is anything that could have been done to make me buy that Mike Barnes was that good of a fighter. The answer is yes, there could have been.  And the fact that nothing was done to give Barnes' some legitimacy, is another reason I hate this film. They could have shown Barnes winning junior World Championships or junior Olympic gold medals. I also think they could have shown Terry Silver training with Mike Barnes, going over everything to expect from Daniel. I would have appreciated a scene where Silver first instructs Daniel and then shows Mike Barnes everything he taught Daniel. Then in an encounter with Barnes, Daniel confesses to Terry Silver that he can't figure out why he can't get a hit in on Barnes. It's as if Barnes has an answer to every move Daniel tries. I would have appreciated something like that. Instead all we're left with is that Daniel, who was able to put up decent fights against two time All Valley champion Johnny Lawrence and Okinawan Karate expert Chosen, can't even get one hit on "bad boy" Mike Barnes.

I once read that the screenplay for Karate Kid III was actually written before the screenplay for Karate Kid II, and it was intended to be the original follow up to The Karate Kid. Producers felt that it was too similar to the original film, and they opted to go with what became Karate Kid II, instead. When it came time to make a third sequel, instead of writing a new script and having to shell out more money for it, they already had the rights to this script and they decided to go with it.

What a stupid decision. What a cheap, lazy and stupid decision. The characters Mr. Miyagi and Daniel Larusso deserved a better send off than this. Pat Morita and Ralph Macchio deserved a better send off than this.

I'll give the movie that it still had some tender moments between Morita and Macchio. Despite having nothing to work with in a shit-script, the two still had some great on screen chemistry. I felt bad for Robin Lively, who did her best in spite of what she had to work with.

This film had no excuses. There is no reason this sequel should be as bad as what it is. I do not blame any of the actors at all. They all did their part. It is the result of a cheap and lazy production and as you can tell, I'm not very forgiving of it.

2. A Nightmare on Elm Street 2 

Out of all of the Nightmare on Elm Street films this is the hardest one for me to sit through. Part 5 is also difficult too, but this one is a little worse. It lacks the scares, the laughs and the overall enjoyment that the original film had. The characters aren't at all interesting and the darker tone adds nothing to the film. If anything it takes away from it. I'm very surprised that another sequel was made after this film considering how bad it was. I'm glad it was though, because part 3 is my favorite out of all of the films.

1. Jaws The Revenge 

Oh God, where do I start? This isn't only the worst sequel ever made, it's one of the worst movies ever made. My condolences to anyone who has ever been able to make it all the way through this film. If you need a hug or to talk about the horrific experience it was for you, I am here for you. This was torture, pure torture.

A roaring shark? Need I say more? The way they killed the shark...need I say more?

How about the explanation behind Martin Brody's death. How he died of a heart attack, because "the fear of the shark killed him."  Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Floating on a piece of wood, he shoots one shark as it is on its way to devour him and it explodes. Then in Jaws 2, he goes out on an air-tube and holds up a cable for the shark to bite and electrocute itself. He does that, but simply thinking about the shark, while he's on land terrifies him to death...literally.

And Lorraine Gary having flashbacks from events she wasn't there to see from the first film! Whose idea was this!!??! I'm told as a writer that my stuff isn't good enough to publish because of little minor mistakes! Who the Hell allowed this into the film!?!? Who!??! They should be drug out into the street and shot along with the Superman IV: The Quest for Peace special effects team.

I don't know if someone tried if they could make a sequel worse than this one.  I guess the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre as well as the remake both have pretty bad sequels too, but they weren't exactly spectacular films to begin with either.