/ Worst films ever
All I can say is that I dont think I have ever watched such a plss poor film. An hour of my life that I will never, ever get back.
I wonder, has anyone seen a film of train crash proportions? If not, i claim my £5.00. Actually, make that £10 as £5 isnt recompense enough for enduring this rot.
On the advice of a previous thread on this topic, I went and looked up "Samurai Cop" on youtube.
Sweet Jesus....So cringingly bad, it's actually good.
Lord of the Rings.
Notting Hill is probably the worst film I've ever seen.
Actually no Harry Potter.
> The script was fine! The problem was, they used British Acting Robot Mk1
deep blue sea,blue water and snakes on a plane get my vote.
Knight and day's pretty crap and i only saw part of it
starship troopers is one of the worst i've watched to the end
cloverfield, disliked the cast so much i was cheering the monster
Better watched whilst heavily stoned.
Oh come on. This film is classic entertainment! Guns, monsters, a cute redhead and a tongue stuck very firmly in cheek.
I couldn't get past 10 minutes of this dross.
I think this has be seperated into:
A) Worst Film watched
B)Worst Film I paid to watch!
A = One with Kate Hudson and someone stealing her BF. Probably caused by watching it on about 10 buses in South America, at least 7 of them in Spanish
B = Just Married 4 couples in cinema. 2 left within 10mins, 1 guy sat on the floor and looked at teh back ofthe cinema while his GF coniunued to watch and I spent the time trying to tie my shoeaces without using my hands
i accept starship poopers could have been a good shoot em up, but it wants to be futuristic but fails to use the many more efficient weapons that we have now
> i accept starship poopers could have been a good shoot em up, but it wants to be futuristic but fails to use the many more efficient weapons that we have now
Sorry, but in a film where there are mutant spiders pooping out space fireballs, I just can't bring myself to fault them for not using better weapons!
The entire point of the battles was marines pointlessly throwing themselves into the line of fire. Last one shot is a wuss type mentality.
aye, i can hardly complain, it's set in a barking mad universe so nothing should look out of place
also ... most films with 4 or more oscars
may i offer "driving miss daisy"
starts, goes nowhere, ends
"Hamilton is Out", starring Richard Burton.
Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus is pretty bad, so is Sharktopus. Worth YouTube-ing though, for lolz.
"Hamilton is Out", starring Richard Burton
"Hammersmith is Out", starring Richard Burton
Waterloo with Marlon Brando and Christopher plummer is right up there
> Waterloo with Marlon Brando and Christopher plummer is right up there
Christopher Plummer actually does a good job; it's Rod Steiger (in the role of Napoleon) who is definitely well below par. Brando isn't in the movie. But it's churlish to damn Waterloo as one of the 'worst films ever' because the battle scenes by Bondarchuk are stupendous.
More of the type of so bad you should see them are:
1, Nude nuns with big guns
2, Hobo with a shotgun
He stars (with Caroline Munro and the mighty Hoff) in a world class "so bad it's good" movie. Starcrash (1979) - astonishingly, I mean really amazingly bad Star Wars wannabe:
My nomination for worst film ever (I'm sure I've said this before): Wild Wild West (with Will Smith & Kevin Cline). It isn't so bad it's good, its just bad with no redeeming features whatsoever. It's still the only time I've ever paid money to go to the cinema and failed to sit through to the end of the film. :o)
Typical Lean-type film scenario: Epically portentous musical bombast, pretty pretty pictures, dialogue so wooden it's got wooden bits on its woodenness, slow slow SLOW acting, and then nothing happens. For hours on end.
Oh, and whatever anyone tells you: Taxi Driver is terrible. And so is Withnail and I :-)
Starcrash (1979) -
What a beaut !!
I think most of the 'actors' would delete this from their CV's if they could.
Watching this trailer I got feelings of 'Clash of the Titans','Zardoz','Lost World', 'Sinbad' etc... I suppose a good storyline can be modified for whichever genre (ahem!), but it looks less convincing than The Clangers in terms of visual FX.
Caroline Munro might be worthy of a bit internet research I feel, let me see now .........
> More of the type of so bad you should see them are:
> 1, Nude nuns with big guns
I havent seen this movie but with a title like that, it cant be that bad, can it? Ill look this one up.
I thin the only film that I have ever paid to go and see at the cinema but walked out before the end was Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure. Deary me.
'Great Expectations'? 'Brief Encounter'? 'Oliver Twist'? 'Bridge on the River Kwai'? Doctor 'Zhivago'?
'Laurence of Arabia' really needs to be seen at a cinema to enjoy the immensity. True, it doesn't rattle along like a Steven Seagull film, but if that's your bag then I think you walked into the wrong room in the multiplex.
One could be forgiven for cynically thinking you're being a little wilfully controversial, Tim. ;)
> Oh, and whatever anyone tells you: Taxi Driver is terrible. And so is Withnail and I :-)
Interesting you mention these two; both are examples of enjoying acting or performance over the storyline. The arc of the pieces depend on how you engage or are repulsed by your reaction and interest in the character(s). True that the first moves slowly, and the latter moves in hardly a great direction. But both have performances by characters that move you, make you interested in what occurs - and lives in the memory for a long time after. To be rather pompous, both are closer to theatre than cinema.
And I read an interview with De Niro last Sunday. Yes, he still gets stopped in the street by people asking him "You talkin' to me?" :D
> One could be forgiven for cynically thinking you're being a little wilfully controversial, Tim. ;)
Wilfully controversial? Moi?
I admit it, I was born stirring :-)
"You talkin' to me?" :D
Brilliant line. Terrible movie :-)
> Notting Hill is probably the worst film I've ever seen.
I'm the one who thinks, in all seriousness, that The Sound of Music is a far better movie than Reservoir Dogs.
Am I controversial or what? ;-)
> Typical Lean-type film scenario: Epically portentous musical bombast, pretty pretty pictures, dialogue so wooden it's got wooden bits on its woodenness, slow slow SLOW acting, and then nothing happens. For hours on end.
What shameful tripe you utter. What is astonishing about Lawrence of Arabia is the levity, subtlety and wit of the script (dark, satirical and funny) ... and just about everything else about it. I would go as far as saying it's the highest point of British cinema.
When did you last see the movie?
Passage to India was only dreadful because the screenplay stuck far too faithfully to the epic structure of the novel, which was totally uncinematic in shape.
In time David Lean's preeminent stature in the British cinema will be fully appreciated, I think.
> I'm the one who thinks, in all seriousness, that The Sound of Music is a far better movie than Reservoir Dogs.
> Am I controversial or what? ;-)
You seem to be revelling in your (presumably drink-fuelled) contrariness, Tim. But how can anyone take you seriously now on the basis of this thread?
Weeeeeeeeeeelll Gordon, a lot of people still take you seriously, despite all the stuff you've come out with.
I mean it, though, and stone-cold sober: The Sound of Music is not a very good movie, but it's certainly better than anything Tarantino's produced. That view may not be terribly cool or trendy, but then, who gives a damn about cool and trendy?
> I'm the one who thinks, in all seriousness, that The Sound of Music is a far better movie than Reservoir Dogs.
> Am I controversial or what? ;-)
Chalk and cheese - which is better?
> What shameful tripe you utter.
You've clearly appointed yourself Official Guardian of Received (but Wrong) Opinion. Fine, carry on, no one's listening :-)
> Chalk and cheese - which is better?
Would you rather be chalked up, or overload on the cheese?
I'm not a 'guardian' of anything. But Bulls Crack has hit the nail on the head. One of the great joys of the cinema, as with all other art forms, is that there is an almost infinite range of genres, and that unlike can never be compared with unlike. All that matters to me is how well a film works in the world it sets up, and that it entertains, and gives you something extra (relating to core issues of life), such that you will carry on thinking and talking about it long after you've seen it.
PS. It also has to be a superbly crafted work of art.
> I'm not a 'guardian' of anything. But Bulls Crack has hit the nail on the head. One of the great joys of the cinema, as with all other art forms, is that there is an almost infinite range of genres, and that unlike can never be compared with unlike. All that matters to me is how well a film works in the world it sets up, and that it entertains, and gives you something extra (relating to core issues of life), such that you will carry on thinking and talking about it long after you've seen it.
All this I agree with. Still. Lawrence of Arabia is unwatchably terrible, and so is Passage to India.
> PS. It also has to be a superbly crafted work of art.
Actually I think the evidence tells against that one. A lot of the most enjoyable films are deeply throwaway.
> All this I agree with. Still. Lawrence of Arabia is unwatchably terrible, and so is Passage to India.
L of A is one of the longest films ever made, but it keeps you held from the very first minute to the last. Passage to India is a mere shade of Lean's earlier work, made by a very old and ailing man, and I'm afraid it shows.
As a matter of fact the last four films I've seen at our superb local cinema (in last fortnight) are:
Lawrence of Arabia (digital restoration)
The Nutcracker (live digital from the Bolshoi)
It's a Wonderful Life, Frank Capra (digital restoration)
Great Expectations, Newell.
All 5 stars in their very different ways. Can't say which I enjoyed most.
I think I'd have enjoyed all of those, except the first :-)
> Christopher Plummer actually does a good job; it's Rod Steiger (in the role of Napoleon) who is definitely well below par. Brando isn't in the movie.
duh, of course, sorry for that thanks for the correction
the dialogue is cringe worthy
Glorious 39. A staggeringly awful, insulting, time-thieving film.
Now I cant comment from a position of authority as i didnt see the film myself but I do remember reading quite a bit about it at its time of release.
The Empire review, strangely, makes me want to see the film to judge for myself quite how bad it actually was.
So, did anyone actually watch the modern classic that is Gigli?
It would seem, thanks to Empire voters, that you are all incorrect.
What I can say, is that I have only seen the number one spot out of this apparent line up of a quality viewing.
Piranha 3D. Plenty of lolz to be had watching some of it on youtube though!
Agreed. Mindnumbingly bad. Childishly unaccomplished. Totally unbelievable.
"Nazis at the Centre of the Earth" and "Arachnoquake" both sound like contenders for the Worst Ever Film-Title award.
Pterodactyl - 2005 must rank down there with the worst of 'em. With a lowly IMDB 3.2 rating, its one of those 'so bad its good' kind of films.
Here is a sample scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ4KzClb1C4
If you want to fully appreciate exactly how long 90 minutes of your life can feel, I recommend this film highly!
sooo bad. Liked this comment
'I saw this movie on a plane and people still walked out'
Not sure if it's the worst ever. Be certainly the worst I saw in 2012 -
Man it was so bad. I think it's the first film I've ever given up on. I don't think i've ever shouted at the television before...
> Here is a sample scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ4KzClb1C4
> If you want to fully appreciate exactly how long 90 minutes of your life can feel, I recommend this film highly!
Nah, its a wind up, that cant be a real movie.
I'll say it again.
I was stuck at the wrong end of the row and allowed my politeness (or british reserve, or whatever) to overrule my rising hate for a truly abysmal film.
> Nah, its a wind up, that cant be a real movie.
"I saw this movie on a plane and people still walked out."
Daft as it is, I really liked the Matrix.
If you think it's a contender for "worst films ever" though, you should try watching the sequel. ;o)
> sooo bad. Liked this comment
> 'I saw this movie on a plane and people still walked out'
Thanks for the tip. I will make a point of seeking it out. As car racing films go it will have to beat the execrable "Days of Thunder" to be a contender.
Having Googled a good many sites on the topic I can only offer this suggestion: Do not trust any "worst films" list which contains "Heaven's Gate".
Nobody's mentioned Grease 2, genuinely terrible.
So I gather. Ive done some reading up on it and I am actually curious to watch it now. In some quarters, its suggested as being the worst film ever made. How can I not watch it.
I'd echo that - we've tried to watch the Matrix twice and just can't stand it. I think we tried one the sequels as well (suckers for punishment) and couldn't stand that either
> Nah, its a wind up, that cant be a real movie.
It's really not! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Room_(film)#Production Just read that paragraph! Half way through one of the actors walked out, so all of a sudden you just get another guy playing one of the parts... Must be seen to be believed. Five Stars.
star wars xmas special. so bad it becomes so good it becomes bad again.
its actually got the real cast - with singing, and animated bits about bobba fett, and a whole scene set in chewbaccas home town. total stoner material, a real room stopper at parties.
im going to 2nd lord of the rings. if it hadnt been a book with a religious following it would have been waterworld in 3 parts, tho if i remember correctly waterworld had one or two bikini sequences.
I've just spent half an hour watching a family of Wookies gibbering at each other without a clue what on Tatooine is going on!! There is a faint hope that a storyline might strike back......dear God...how did this pass the sanity police?
> star wars xmas special.
It was the "Holiday Special" and was for Thanksgiving, not Christmas.
I have willingly watched it all the way through (with original ads) three times, which might be a record.
Alec Guiness managed to get out of participating, somehow.
> It was the "Holiday Special"
I think the Ewok films Caravan of Courage etc are actually worse, if you can believe that!
I saw Caravan of Courage when I was 11 and found it utterly boring! I never saw the other one and can't remember its name
The other was The Battle for Endor according to Wikipedia.
I don't remember much between them in terms of quality.
Burn after Reading. Have I mentioned that one before? Sphincter-tighteningly awful.
I'm starting to think that most of the films that have been on the TV in the last week are eligible for a high ranking on the worst films ever list.
I was talked into believing that "Up" was a life-changing experience, well its about half-way through and I have resorted to UKC to stop me doing harm to the television set.
Seriously, its complete dross.
field of dreams, utter boredom, no baseball film should be shown outside the US
However much you didnt like it (Field of Dreams), it's still utterly absurd to call that one of the 'worst films ever'. Really, really, really absurd.
> However much you didnt like it (Field of Dreams), it's still utterly absurd to call that one of the 'worst films ever'.
Agree, baseball itself is a tedious game (he's says laying himself open to a mauling) but the film concerns itself about many other issues. The baseball is just the vehicle that carries it along. The film is worth it for Burt Lancaster's performance alone, and if you know the subtext to this, his last major film role, it can invoke a lump in the throat. Now that's not the worst film in the world.
i think a dose of electric kool aid likely helps. worth seeing the bobba fett cartoon tho - just aching to be sampled to 110bpm.
always willing to be corrected by those more obsessive than myself.
three times thru is a symptom of something (the original ads im assuming were no worse than the film???).
i hope they do a lord of the rings holiday special, and this time the wizard stays!
each to their own, but i can see how it will be boring to many, but bad...i cant concurr.
(i admit to loving it)
> However much you didnt like it (Field of Dreams), it's still utterly absurd to call that one of the 'worst films ever'. Really, really, really absurd.
Well this is the thing. For example, many of Mr Chapell's "worst films ever" are films greatly loved by lots and lots of people who are really passionately into cinema.
I love Withnail and I, but not bothered about Taxi Driver. Burn After Reading is not a good Cohen Brothers film, but is still miles ahead of standard Hollywood dross.
I could name loads of films I happened not to enjoy, many of which would be classics that people who are into that type of thing will rave about.
The question is, is there such a thing as objectively bad? Without question, if there was such a thing, Withnail and I would not be it. I doubt Field of Dreams would be either (although, like combining a bottle of whisky with sedatives, it puts me in danger of vomiting in my sleep).
I suspect that there is some sort of measure of 'objective quality' which has got something to do with a 'justified consensus' (i.e. it is not simply box office figures, it matters what people say about the film in question) and can distinguish 'films I didn't like' from 'films that should not have been made because they diminish humanity'. And I think that some people have a firmer grasp of that measure than others.
> 'films that should not have been made because they diminish humanity'
An excellent phrase. Directors ought to be asking themselves that before they start each new project.
Any one vote for Salmon Fishing in the Yemen ?- a true shocker.
Feel robbed even watching the £3 Tesco DVD.
I would say it's a half decent film, nothing more. Which puts it several levels above some of his brother's output.
As for big budget stinkers, I hereby nominate Troy, which I watched last night. Was it the woste film ever? No? Should it have been better for the money invested? Hell yes.
I'm so tempted to say 'Life of Pi' which I saw last night, but I know that would be unfair. I think it was probably a very good film, however there was a lot of it that I really didn't enjoy.
I walked out of Lost In Space
Beat me too it. This means a lot of the 'worst' low budget films in some respects are actually OK as they were crafted quickly but with love and humour. Ditto the big budget flops (they are shit value for money more than terrible). The worst objective quality relates to almost no artistic drive or cinematic craft as they got lost in the greed and politics that Hollywood is infested with: nearly always mid-priced bandwagon films with production problems rushed out to low box office receipts.
These threads (film, music, classic climb, whatever) also bring out the plain silly, thoughtless and sometimes needlessly cruel: defining quality on personal taste is moronic; deliberately citing some of the classics as trash is a little bit below toilet humour; bullying someone who loves something is low indeed.
If you haven't seen it before it's a 'mountain film', with not a great deal of climbing in it, but alot of people walking around in climbing gear, and a hell of alot of The North Face product placement. The film ropes you in (excuse the pun), and then drip feeds you the religious undertones, culminating in one of the climbers, returning from Mt Checanagua (Supposedly in Chile), and converting to Christianity.
Probably not THE worst film, but certainly a shit film, save for the few mountain scenes, and I always feel like it insults my intelligence.
...On the other hand K2, very good I think. The eiger sanction, fantastic.
This thread has reminded me of a trip to the cinema to watch The Ring.
There were only about 8 of us watching the film, and I managed to make most of them jump by shouting BOO!! during a suspenceful bit and making my girlfriend scream in terror. Even typing this now years later is making me chuckle.
"Hollywood chainsaw hookers" is pretty bad, but far from the worst film I have ever seen to the end.
Im in bed with really bad manflu and i had to stop reading as i couldnt breathe due to laughing
> It's really not! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Room_(film)#Production Just read that paragraph! Half way through one of the actors walked out, so all of a sudden you just get another guy playing one of the parts... Must be seen to be believed. Five Stars.
Skyline. It had all the things that ought to make it a big hit for me (guns, aliens and car chases). But it was unmitigated shite.
> Skyline. It had all the things that ought to make it a big hit for me (guns, aliens and car chases). But it was unmitigated shite.
Have you copy-and-pasted this? It rings a bell!
No. I keep saying it. Because it keeps being true.
trivia: Skyline was the first film to be produced entirely with high dynamic range processes. All filming, effects etc were done in HDR.
Therefore HDR is bad and should be banned! '-)
Clearly it was HDR wotsit that made it a shite film :-)
I can't believe no-one's mentioned No Country For Old Men....
Woman in Black - Daniel Radcliffe one. Worst ending ever after a dreary film.
Blair Witch project - wanted to walk out of cinema.
You, Me and Dupree - actually walked out of cinema.
C'mon that isnt the same thing. If it is good then it cant be bad. This was an absolutely brilliant film. It was supposed to be that way.
There is a difference between films which just suck and films which are intentionally made to be rediculous.
> More of the type of so bad you should see them are:
> 1, Nude nuns with big guns
> 2, Hobo with a shotgun
I assume you also have netflix...
> I can't believe no-one's mentioned No Country For Old Men....
Wash your mouth out, with vim.
Stuff that is unintentionally crap:
Waterworld (although Jeanette Tripplehorn or whatever she is called was rather cute)
Lord of the Rings
all three Star Wars prequels
all Matrix films
Of course, nothing beats the 1960s Japanese monster films like Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla
Well, like I said in my post above there's "films I didn't enjoy" and there's films that can justifiably described as crap. NCFOM is not one of my favourite films, I found it unbearably depressing by the end. But in terms of craft it is absolutely stunning, and anyone who can't make this distinction should probably stick to lowest common denominator Hollywood dross.
It is absolutely wonderfully entertaining.
Rubber - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rubber-DVD/dp/B004OQJSOU
About a rubber tyre that goes on a killing spree.
There are only going to be two types of opinion about this film.
1. People who try and take it seriously and then complain it was an absolutely awful film.
2. People who see the downright comedy and humour in it without their being comedy or humour presented.
"Lost in translation" - pretentious shite, how it got nominated for an oscar is beyond me. Watched it in Weymouth on a trip to Portland to keep us out the pub, it only succeeded in that respect as we slept most of the way through. People's mobile phones going off were a welcome distraction, would have walked out but couldn't be arsed.
> Wash your mouth out, with vim.
They did screw up the ending by missing a vital scene out. I was ok because I had read the book, but I could hear a chorus of "WTF?!" from the rest of the cinema.
One of the best baddies I think although I cant quite work out what his weapon is.
> "Lost in translation" - pretentious shite, how it got nominated for an oscar is beyond me. Watched it in Weymouth on a trip to Portland to keep us out the pub, it only succeeded in that respect as we slept most of the way through. People's mobile phones going off were a welcome distraction, would have walked out but couldn't be arsed.
What were you expecting Lost In Translation to be like?
It's definitely not a favourite film of mine, but it's a million miles away from being dreadful. If you want to see some pretentious shite, try something in which "nobody knows what the hell is going on"*.
Here's a few suggestions:
All have something to recommend them, but this is what a pretentious film looks like IMO, not just a fairly quiet social drama.
> What were you expecting Lost In Translation to be like?
> It's definitely not a favourite film of mine, but it's a million miles away from being dreadful.
It often turns up in threads such as these - seems to get peoples backs up for some reason.
I enjoyed it.
I just popped over to badmovies.org and found a review of "2-HEADED SHARK ATTACK"
Buckaroo Banzai in the 8th dimension.
Early outings for peter weller, John lithgow, jeff goldblum and sundry others. So bad it's........ bad
For some reason that one has a lot of fanatical fans. I just couldn't be bothered with it at all.
Here's a few contenders (IMHO, of course):
I read an interview with Meg Ryan once, in which she said that her mum had thought Kevin Costner and Mark Harmon were the same person - presumably because The Presidio had all the hallmarks of the kind of film Costner might have turned down.
Connery is his usual embarrassing self in this film, that fight scene where he claims to just be using his weak thumb is just screenwriters pandering to his foolish ego.
It's barely a B-movie.
Ultraviolet is pretty bad. I actually deliberately sought it out at the cinema as a potential "worst film ever" but despite its craptitude, it wasn't really THAT bad! I mean, it's crap, but there's worse. It's probably better than (say) Batman and Robin.
I tried the same with The Cave but despite its silliness I rather enjoyed it - lovely sets and cinematography, plus Lena Headey.
only my opinion but "forrest gump" 2 hours of my life wasted
obviously some critics liked it but i'd rather watch paint dry
by the way... i liked lotr and matrix, though matrix has some problems being honest to its own universe
aye i was cheering the monster, the characters were so unlikeable
Kill Bill is pretty crap.
Baise-Moi is the worst film I've seen in a while.
For me, the films I've enjoyed the least are those which were hyped to buggery beforehand. If I've paid to watch it rather than waited for the telly then it compounds the problem.
Truly, Madly, Deeply takes top prize for me. It even has Alan Rickman in it, and is still awful.
Fried Green Tomatoes at the WhistleStop Cafe. Should have expected this to not to be my cup of tea, but sooooo bored.
Matrix Reloaded. Unwatchable drivel. I know some people don't like any of them, but I liked the Matrix...
> For me, the films I've enjoyed the least are those which were hyped to buggery beforehand. If I've paid to watch it rather than waited for the telly then it compounds the problem.
> Truly, Madly, Deeply takes top prize for me. It even has Alan Rickman in it, and is still awful.
> Fried Green Tomatoes at the WhistleStop Cafe. Should have expected this to not to be my cup of tea, but sooooo bored.
Those two weren't particularly "hyped to buggery"!
Just as an aside, how many hours of you life do you get back?
Perhaps I was reading the wrong publications at the time. I remember rave reviews for both...
A couple of good reviews is not the same as "hyped to buggery"
Gosh. Slight hyperbole on a lighthearted forum post. Who will save us?
Elsewhere on the site
Perhaps the perfect Xmas gift for the climber in your life... Wild Country's Crack School has two of the worlds best crack... Read more
The release of Peter Jackson's new film The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies on 12th December may not appear to link to... Read more