Your number one WORST film ever.

There are a lot of movies I dislike because of aspects of the film (bad acting, bad story, bad writing, bad effects..etc..) but only one movie that I have seen fails across the board.

I mean in a lot of the movies listed here in some of them there are SOME redeeming qualities. And of course everyone has their own taste.

An example is the Grindhouse movies, I love them, they were MADE TO BE BAD, like the old b movies shown at grindhouses...however, this is about what I think the worst movie I have ever seen is...and again it failed in every aspect of film making.....don't laugh.....Disaster Movie!!! :)
 
This is the best you could do with this cast?

514WJPX1ZHL__SL500.jpg
 
Hey, I liked Nothing But Trouble! Then again, I pretty much like everything.

My least favorite movie of all time has to be John Waters' Hairspray. I don't mind John Waters movies in general, but Hairspray was like "watered down" Waters. I found it totally unwatchable.

-Mike
 
Funny Games. Worst movie I ever had to sit thru (and I do preview movie screenings, so I see a lot of movies every year). Followed really closely by Saint John of Las Vegas.

Terry
 
Manos: The Hands of Fate.

It makes every other movie out there better. EVERY ONE!

It's so bad that the MST3K crew actually apologized for how bad it is during their show of it. It's that bad.
 
I agree Manos is not a good film, but put in perspective, it was made by a couple of guys on their own dime. It's when Roland Emmerich is given a gazillion $$$ and makes something just as bad if not worse than Manos, that I find unforgivable.
 
Manos: The Hands of Fate.

It makes every other movie out there better. EVERY ONE!

It's so bad that the MST3K crew actually apologized for how bad it is during their show of it. It's that bad.


MST3K-worthy movies are a category unto themselves because they're so bad they're good. I could go on at length about PLENTY of movies like that, from Roger Corman films, to Italian B-movies, to Troll 2. But as I said, they're so bad they're good.

I think big-budget movies rarely fall into this category, simply because they tend to take themselves FAR more seriously, and have so many advantages going for them that you demand more of them. Battlefield Earth had a huge budget by comparison with, say, any SyFy Original Movie (Frankenfish, Basilisk, Giant Shark vs. Killer Octopus, etc.). Plus, Battlefield Earth has the whole scientology connection. It's just that it's so absurdly bad that it becomes funny.

But other truly awful films like Batman & Robin, Transformers 1, or any number of other films are awful and have no redeeming humorous value. You could try to riff them, but you'd probably just end up wanting to put your fist through your TV. To me, those are the really bad movies because, not only are they poorly acted, scripted, etc., but they also squandered such huge advantages.

Anyone can make a bad movie with a small budget. That's not hard to do. But to take a huge budget and turn that into a travesty...that's not just bad film, it's insulting and unjust because those funds COULD have gone towards a GOOD movie to make it into a FANTASTIC movie.
 
Wild, Wild West. Ugh.

Was waiting for this one to come up...

I don't quite get the angst. Especially in this community. Its a pretty prop-rich film, with a fun production design.

Its not a great film, but I think its fun.

Then again, I wasn't a follower of the original, and I know this was a bit of a departure.
 
I agree Manos is not a good film, but put in perspective, it was made by a couple of guys on their own dime. It's when Roland Emmerich is given a gazillion $$$ and makes something just as bad if not worse than Manos, that I find unforgivable.


Agreed. This is another criterion for a truly bad film. You need to factor in the people behind the film.

All the more reason why Pearl Harbor ranks WAY up there. Folks love to hate Bay (I do too), but he is considered a power house film maker who should be able to do better.

Not to mention he had Bruckheimer behind him.

I think when considering this, you need to ask what the film was meant to be, and what its expecations were. Another consideration is the impact a film's failure has on the industry.

Battlefield Earth for example - outside of Travolta's head, no one expected or thought it was going to be a gem.

Transformers or Transformers 2 - good or bad, its mental junk food, nothing more.

Godzilla? Emmerich films are always rich with cheese.

A film about Pearl Harbor, produced in contemporary times, had so much potential. Its a very serious subject matter, and one that - if done right - could be a contender for a Best Picture.


Michael Bay or not, I think expectations were high.
 
falling down with michael douglas.

if I want to see something about futsie 'future shock syndrome' I may as well read an issue of 2000ad with judge dredd in.

I though it was a poor movie with a good message behind it that got lost somewhere
 
Agreed. This is another criterion for a truly bad film. You need to factor in the people behind the film.

All the more reason why Pearl Harbor ranks WAY up there. Folks love to hate Bay (I do too), but he is considered a power house film maker who should be able to do better.

Not to mention he had Bruckheimer behind him.

Good point. Plus, it fails on the "so bad it's good" scale. Personally, I don't find any redeeming value of Transformers 1 (and wasn't dumb enough to see #2), but I can see where SOME people would say "Well, it's just big robots fighting. That's all I cared about" and be satisfied by that. But yeah, Pearl Harbor was pretty godawful and really took a crap approach to what could've been a serious subject matter.

I'd say the same is true of The Patriot with Mel Gibson. I can enjoy it for some of the action sequences, but it's so hamstrung by Emmerich's penchant for beat-you-over-the-head messaging and cheese that I just have a REALLY hard time watching it and it makes me angry. Again, a subject matter that COULD be treated seriously, but that just crap on it by turning it into a hammy schlock-fest.
 
Oh no, another one of my favorite movies pops up in this thread!

I love Falling Down, except for the ending. As a defense contractor and "angry white male" myself, I could totally relate to this movie. I just wish DFENS could have gotten a happy ending.

To stay somewhat on topic, I'll add that my second least favorite movie is one of those Uwe Boll crapfests. It was so bad that I forgot which one it was!

Mike
 
Was waiting for this one to come up...

I don't quite get the angst. Especially in this community. Its a pretty prop-rich film, with a fun production design.

Its not a great film, but I think its fun.

Then again, I wasn't a follower of the original, and I know this was a bit of a departure.

I never saw the original - I just thought this one was slow, unfunny and predictable. Props are fine, but they don't make a movie.
 
Watchmen - I was really interested to see, I even liked some characters, but the scheming plot of Ozymandias was truely utter ****, not even very intelligent for someone who claims to be the smartest guy on earth... and if that's the best graphic novel ever (Times), you must have a very low standard.... sorry.

You have got to watch the directors cut...It is SOOOOOOOOOOO much better it's like a totally different movie.
 
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top