Worst Netflix Blurb

So Netflix puts these little blurbs on the backs of its sleeves and it's glaringly obvious how often they were written by someone who hadn't seen the movie. For instance, the one for Bolt called Bolt a German shepherd.

What's the most inaccurate Netflix blurb you can find? I submit A Scanner Darkly:

Keanu Reeves shoulders another futuristic role in director Richard Linklater's sci-fi thriller based on Philip K. Dick's novel. Working as an undercover cop in a world where almost everyone is addicted to Substance D—which produces split personalities in its users—Fred Arctor (Reeves) sets up an elaborate sting to nab a notorious drug runner named Bob. But little does Fred know that "Bob" is...his alter ego.

• facepalm*

Reminds me of the blurb on the back of one of the Futurama season DV Ds that briefly summarised the episodes it contained, including spoiling "The Sting"'s Twist Ending. Maybe they just assume that if you buy the DVD/get a film off Netflix, you already know the ending...

Bolt is a German Shepherd. There is a version of the breed with white fur.

I thought it was hilarious on the Hamlet(1996) that they purposely try to get Americans to enjoy it based on its celebirty guest stars. I thought what was more funny was the fact that they listed Billy Crystal, Kate Winslet, and Robin Williams, but neglected the late, great Charlton Heston. That was weird to me.

Oh, great forum topic. Whenever I see a particularly terrible one I'll be sure to post it here.

What's worse is that they make Uwe Boll movies sound exciting.

I was about to Instant Watch one before I noticed "UWE BOLL" on the image.

I present to you a particularly rage inducing example for Doctor Who episode School Reunion:

When the Krillitanes exploit students to obtain ultimate power, Doctor Who and Rose come to the rescue. Much to Who's dismay, he bumps into an old colleague who is just as unhappy to see him as he to see her. And the TARDIS gets a new crewmate

Let's count all the things wrong with this....all of the Season 2 descrips are like this.

What's so incorrect about it? (For people who've never heard of Scanner Darkly before)

^First of all, it's "Fred" and Bob Arctor, not Fred Arctor and "Bob." And he doesn't have multiple personalities—he's just gradually losing his grip on reality altogether. And Bob isn't a notorious drug runner, he's a completely run-of-the-mill drug user. The description makes it sound like a police crime thriller, when it's actually a psychological movie about drugs and paranoia.

That's true. When I first read the description I instantly thought it was a Film Noir esque movie.

What about Bob being his "alter ego"? Jossed too?

Okay, about the Doctor Who episode (lucky, as I only watched it a day or two ago), they got the name "Doctor Who" wrong, but they got the premise fine...

When the Krillitanes exploit students to obtain ultimate power, Doctor Who and Rose come to the rescue.

Which they DO. They steal the minds and souls of students to get what is known as "the God Maker" and the building blocks of space and time. That's not power enough? Admittedly, the real reason the Doctor and Rose came was because of part of the school's staff being replaced, so the rescue part is a misnomer though they do rescue students.

Much to Who's dismay, he bumps into an old colleague who is just as unhappy to see him as he to see her.

Sarah Jane's more stunned than unhappy upon remeeting him, though she's definitely upset that the Doctor has apparently moved on to loads of other, younger companions, such as Rose and the Doctor gives her the whole "curse of the Time Lords" speech. Though, the Doctor (at least initially) isn't that unhappy to see her.

And the TARDIS gets a new crewmate

Yes, actually.

edited 26th Sep '10 11:40:12 AM by OldManHoOh

The blurb for Invader Zim has some pretty dumb bits.

In this fun animated series,

Yeah, i don't think so...

Earth's inhabitants are about to get the shock of their lives.

Or they would, if anyone on Earth was actually PAYING ATTENTION.

and Earth is the next planet on their list to conquer.

Except no it wasn't. Sending Zim to Earth was just an excuse to get rid of him.

^ But Invader Zim is a fun animated series. 0_o

I think the main problem with the Doctor Who one was the fact they said 'Much to Who's dismay' and 'Doctor Who and Rose'.

On a related topic, the DVD back gives away the entirety of the movie for Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III, including the ending.

I should get a job writing Netflix blurbs, and just fabricate hyperbole and outright falsehoods.

While we're on Doctor Who, the special "Planet of the Dead" is pretty bad too:

While making a routine commute on a London double-decker, Doctor Who (David Tennant) and his fellow passengers are mysteriously transported through a wormhole to a planet inhabited by an endangered anthropomorphic species known as the Tritovore. Aided by the daring cat burglar Lady Christina de Souza (Michelle Ryan), the Doctor sets out to defend the Tritovore from a race of menacing aliens that are plotting to take over their planet.

He's called Doctor Who again. The Tritovore aren't endangered. They don't inhabit that planet: they crashed there. There are only two of them. They get killed very quickly. Saving them was never the Doctor's goal. And the aliens, which aren't intelligent and so don't plot anything, already destroyed that planet.

edited 27th Sep '10 2:33:26 AM by jewelleddragon

I think the main problem with the Doctor Who one was the fact they said 'Much to Who's dismay' and 'Doctor Who and Rose'.

Oh, I agree with that, just not the whole "EVERYTHING IS WRONG LET ME COUNT THE WAYS".

^^^^^ Yes, the tv show with kids getting their eyeballs torn out is "fun"!

Anti-Flame Note: I love Invader Zim, i just think that "fun" is a strange word to describe it. "Dark" might be more fitting.

I've got a Netflix blunder. I hope that counts.

The other night I watched My Bloody Valentine, the 1981 version, and Netflix listed it as being made in 2009. Not only that, but they put the cover of the 2009 version as well. It's safe to say it really threw me off when I watched it. I'm sure it would happen to anyone expecting to see the remake.

Despite that little flaw, I thought the original was pretty good.

^The 90s remake of Get Smart is listed as the original series, leaving me mystified as to how to get the original series.

The version of Metropolis they send you is also different from the one on Watch It Now, but they don't have different listings.

^I don't have Netflix, but don't they have a way to report major errors like that?

I used to work as a disc inspector at Netflix and would sometimes read the sleeves (we weren't supposed to, but I read pretty fast and was able to read a few while still working at a decent pace). I remember a few having pretty bad errors in them (I can't remember specific ones though).