Rachel and three of the worst painters known to man get terrorized by a little green guy with bad hygiene. He just wants his gold, but no one thinks to just spend the gold OR kick him across the county.
Also Warwick Davis rides a skateboard, drives a Power Wheel, pogos, teleports, does a Shaggy and Scooby-Doo impression, gets shot a bunch, has super strength, hates cereal, loves shoes, Daffy Ducks a fence, and has Wolverines powers.
Truck stops, crummy arm wrestling, and terrible parenting make up this weeks stinker and P.U. does this one stink! Stallone plays a mediocre trucker, a "good" arm-wrestler and maybe the worst parent ever. How the hell Leonard Part 6 won the Razzie over this turd is a travesty.
So the film revolves around Lincoln Hawk (Stallone) and his son, Michael (David Mendenhall), rekindling their relationship after 10 years of neglect. They do this by truckin' and arm wrastling. As children actor's go, David Mendenhall is pretty bad. You'd really like to step on this kid within 4 minutes of the film. It's very fitting that Stallone's Lincoln Hawk appears to completely ignore the existence of him as his son.
The relationship between the two of these people is astounding. One minute it is just preposterous as Hawk is such a total dirtbag to his son (he's late to his child's graduation because he's gotta take his shirt off and wash his truck) and the next minute is super creepy with child cuddling in a truck cab. Ick. It also tells us that a child's relationship with his father is much more important than the future of the child's life. Michael starts the film out by graduating from military school with honors and finishes the film by giving up everything to become a truck-driving arm wrestler. Nice. Maybe the film is an accurate depiction of how awful awful awful parents can really screw up a child. Or maybe it's just that someone doesn't know how to make a character likable in any way.
There are LOTs and LOTs of lists on the Internet about bad movies and which are the best. But really Stinker Madness isn't about "bad movies". We're about Stinkers.
For years, I've had trouble defining what exactly a "Stinker" is. Well with starting this project, I think I've figured it out.
noun\ˈstiŋ-kər\
: a feature-film that has failed miserably at least in one area of its production and reception but must also succeed in at least one area of its production and reception.
That opens the door up considerably. Consider this: would you put Fast & Furious 6 on the same "bad movie" level as "The Room"? Would you say that "Birdemic" is just as good as "Ninja in the Dragon's Den". No you wouldn't. Some movies fail on multiple levels making them bad whereas others may only fail on one level thus making them just a Stinker.
Its obvious you like Stinker Madness, so subscribe to the podcast and get new episodes of Stinker Madness every week - on your phone, your tablet, your computer, however you like to listen! Once you’ve subscribed, free episodes will automatically download on Fridays and Mondays. Don't know what the hell a podcast is or what it means to subscribe? Enter the present: 
