I have saw the first Jackson's, Bad taste and it is quiet an experience,
The pitch is quiet simple and doesn't suffer to be disclose.
Some alien invader come in a small town in New Zealand and make everybody disappear. The only response of the authority consist of "the boys", a bunch of special action experts. The movie is very funny and very gory, I discovered it 10 year ago and had bought the dvd last year and find it still very funny. You could feel Jackson was potentially an interresting and efficient director. The joke says that his familly has to eat the saucassages used for imitating ET gust for 3 months.

Meeting the feeble is a little different, it is some kind of gory and creepy satyre of "the muppet show". I wouldn't recommand it to children. It's funny but disturbing from time to time. I like it but I wouldn't buy the dvd.

As a comment, the matter with Orson Well was that his first movie was considered for years and year as the best ever made. He couldn't beat himself and ultimately was always looking for producer to his idea. Being an actor was just a way to attract producer sight and also to eat. In my view, Jackson should be considered as the new Lucas, only really gifted and able to write decent dialogue.

You raise an interesting point. Orson Wells was alowys looking for someone else to produce his next big thing. Peter Jackson is his own producer and has never waited or looked for someone else. In fact, Peter created his own production company and special affects co. Each early film helped fund the next, although now he does not have to worry about funding. I guess there is a similarity to Lucas in that respect, except Lucas dodn't start Lucasfilms until after the sucess of Star Wars. With Indiana Jones and Star Wars Lucas has spawned 2 great brands but in my opinion has never done anything of note outside of those two (perhaps TXH1138 and American Grafiti, both pre SW). A fate I do not wish upon Mr. Jackson.

From what I heard, "Frighteners" (the one with M.J. Fox right?) was a flop because people really didn't know what kind of movie it was, which means it's not so much the movie that sucked as was the ads for it.

Hey, I saw "Frighteners" in a theatre, bought the video, loaned the video and consequently lost the video. I thought at the time, and still think that it is one of the best and most fun movies. I did not know Peter Jackson had directed it until after the LOTR. And I agree with Super Baby that it was a flop because A) people didn't know what kind of movie it was and the trailers received almost no TV time Michael J. Fox was considered "washed up" even though he was still (and still is) in the prime of his life.