Worst Movie Ever

[Deleted]

Hey, since we did music, why not this.....

GREASE 2!!! I mean, give me a break.

[shmeep]

I'd have to say the worst movie I've ever seen (and I've seen a lot of crappy movies) would have to be Miracle Mile. It was made back when Anthony Edwards still had a full head of hair and he plays this guy who meets and falls in love with Mare Winningham (with a bad eighties short haircut complete with a tail!) on the day he finds out a nuclear bomb is on its way. He and a group of people who know about the bomb spend the entire movie struggling to get supplies and a helicopter ready so they can escape to the safety of Alaska (or some other cold place) to wait out the fallout and they almost make it. In the end, as chaos breaks out and everyone finds out they're all about to die, the main characters finally take off in their helicopter and head to safety only to be shot down, landing in the Le Brea Tar Pits and in the end, Mare Winningham says to Anthony Edwards, "Maybe they'll find us in the tar pits one day." You know. The way modern man found the Mammoth in the tar pits? Sooo uplifting! I just wanted to sit staring dully at a wall for an hour when it was over. Just horrible and not at all deep. Bad horrible stuff.

Another bad one is Night of the Comet. Remember that? A comet hits and turns everyone on Earth to dust but doesn't destroy any of the material possessions. A few people who were somehow encased in metal during the hit survive and it seems like it could be one endless party, except for the mutants. Yes, people who were partially exposed to the comet are slowly turning into mutants who want to kill everyone so the survivors spend most of the movie dodging mutants...until the mutants naturally all die off in a couple of days and then the entire world belongs to them so everything is all fun again. This movie is so bad it's almost good and I still get a kick out of it when it's on cable.

[housemouse]

Now here's a thread assured to stir up some conversation!! My votes for worst movies ever: Titanic, Ghost and Forest Gump! I hated, hated, hated all three of those movies.

[Deleted]

Speaking of Tom Hanks: Joe Versus the Volcano. A brain cloud? Oy.

And I'm probably going to get heat for this, but ..... Freedomland. I love Ron but I hated the movie. I mean an overdose on cough syrup? Hey, maybe it can happen, who knows, but the whole idea of it was stupid and the movie was disappointing, with the exception of Ron's five minute cameo appearance!

[maggiethecat]

divinemrse said:

And I'm probably going to get heat for this, but ..... Freedomland. I love Ron but I hated the movie. I mean an overdose on cough syrup? Hey, maybe it can happen, who knows, but the whole idea of it was stupid and the movie was disappointing, with the exception of Ron's five minute cameo appearance!

No heat from me -- I'm right there with you. Having read the book, I'll say that this movie may very well prove the notion that novelists should NOT write screenplays from their own books -- all sense of proportion goes out the window. Or maybe it was just Julianne Moore doing one of those "I'm going to prove I can act by looking really dreary and unattractive" turns that I found so annoying? Whatever. A really baaaaaaaaad movie, and a waste of You Know Who.

And Housemouse? Do not get me started on Titanic. What a piece of garbage -- what a waste of money! Plot holes you could drive the proverbial truck through, starting with Leo and Kate running around the ship in freezing water up to their armpits for two hours . . . and they only get hypothermia when they go over the side? Sure. And all that stuff about the art Kate Winslet's character liked being controversial was just hooey: by 1912 the Russian royal family was collecting Impressionist Art, and they were not exactly known for being forward-thinking. Plus two of the paintings they showed propped up in her cabin are in The Museum of Modern Art in NYC (guess someone grabbed them at the last minute and shoved 'em into a lifeboat). Talk about sloppy research.

BTW, James Cameron, the director (a term used loosely in this case) had to issue a formal apology to the descendants of Fourth Officer Boxhall for portraying him as a ferret-faced ninny. No villains in the piece -- other than the iceberg -- so Cameron apparently decided to demonize the crew.

Hate. That. Movie.

[Deleted]

maggiethecat said:

divinemrse said:

And I'm probably going to get heat for this, but ..... Freedomland. I love Ron but I hated the movie. I mean an overdose on cough syrup? Hey, maybe it can happen, who knows, but the whole idea of it was stupid and the movie was disappointing, with the exception of Ron's five minute cameo appearance!

No heat from me -- I'm right there with you. Having read the book, I'll say that this movie may very well prove the notion that novelists should NOT write screenplays from their own books -- all sense of proportion goes out the window. Or maybe it was just Julianne Moore doing one of those "I'm going to prove I can act by looking really dreary and unattractive" turns that I found so annoying? Whatever. A really baaaaaaaaad movie, and a waste of You Know Who.

And Housemouse? Do not get me started on Titanic. What a piece of garbage -- what a waste of money! Plot holes you could drive the proverbial truck through, starting with Leo and Kate running around the ship in freezing water up to their armpits for two hours . . . and they only get hypothermia when they go over the side? Sure. And all that stuff about the art Kate Winslet's character liked being controversial was just hooey: by 1912 the Russian royal family was collecting Impressionist Art, and they were not exactly known for being forward-thinking. Plus two of the paintings they showed propped up in her cabin are in The Museum of Modern Art in NYC (guess someone grabbed them at the last minute and shoved 'em into a lifeboat). Talk about sloppy research.

BTW, James Cameron, the director (a term used loosely in this case) had to issue a formal apology to the descendants of Fourth Officer Boxhall for portraying him as a ferret-faced ninny. No villains in the piece -- other than the iceberg -- so Cameron apparently decided to demonize the crew.

Hate. That. Movie.

Girlfriends, I am SOOOO with you on that!!!!!! My heart didn't go on, it stopped!!!!!! ;D

[inuvik]

My votes would be Lionheart and Money, two Eric Stoltz films. Only saw them because of him. Yuck. Money is not only crappy, it's really long too!

I also didn't like Titanic, but not for the reasons the others gave. I think I've said here before that my favourite genre is disaster films. Well gee--didn't it take about an hour and a half for the ship to start sinking? What's all this romance crap? Sink already!

One of the reasons I loved Poseidon, even though it bombed, was it ditched most of the character development. You don't go see films in this genre for that. The little that was there was tacked on and cheesy, and added to the fun. The ship started sinking only 10 mins into the film, and the film ended as soon as they escaped. Perfect!

[Eyphur]

I pride myself on having never watched Titanic. I never understood how people could go 2,3,6,10,58,212,1486 times to see this movie. Where is the entertainment value in watching people drown? My sister went to see the movie and fell asleep. If I had to see I would hope I Could do the same.

[housemouse]

maggiethecat said:

And Housemouse? Do not get me started on Titanic. What a piece of garbage -- what a waste of money! Plot holes you could drive the proverbial truck through, starting with Leo and Kate running around the ship in freezing water up to their armpits for two hours . . . and they only get hypothermia when they go over the side? Sure. And all that stuff about the art Kate Winslet's character liked being controversial was just hooey: by 1912 the Russian royal family was collecting Impressionist Art, and they were not exactly known for being forward-thinking. Plus two of the paintings they showed propped up in her cabin are in The Museum of Modern Art in NYC (guess someone grabbed them at the last minute and shoved 'em into a lifeboat). Talk about sloppy research.

I never got interested enough to notice any plot holes. Honestly, if Leo and Katie turned down one more corridor to find a locked door, I think my head would have exploded. It was just inane. James Cameron is a no talent twit. I'm not sure who told him he knows how to direct a movie, but they lied.

As for Forest Gump, it was annoying because it was like watching a musician hit the same note over and over for three hours. Tom Hanks just kept plucking away at middle C and called it acting.

Ghost? Where to start. Patrick Swayze had to muster up every bit of energy he could to touch that stupid coin - yet he could sit in a chair! He could walk around on the 10th floor of an apartment, he could stand in a subway car. Umm, hello!! Oh, and the first time someone said "ditto" when I told them I loved them - I'm would be outta there. Romantic, no - wussy, yes.

I gotta mention one more Tom Hanks movie, Philadelphia anyone? I walked out of that movie with a headache from being hit so hard on the top of the head with Jonathan Demme's message. Aye, aye aye. It is amazing to me that Hanks won an Oscar for chewing the scenary one year, and for stumbling through a thoroughly flat role the next.

[housemouse]

divinemrse said:

And I'm probably going to get heat for this, but ..... Freedomland. I love Ron but I hated the movie. I mean an overdose on cough syrup? Hey, maybe it can happen, who knows, but the whole idea of it was stupid and the movie was disappointing, with the exception of Ron's five minute cameo appearance!

It pains me to say this, but I agree with you. Of course Ron's five minutes were brilliant, but the rest of the movie is sheer crap. Way too long and Julianne Moore overacted like crazy.

[shmeep]

I'll make a confession here. I didn't hate Titanic, Forrest Gump, or Ghost. I didn't think any of them were brilliant, but I was entertained by all three. Titanic...I don't remember why I was entertained. In retrospect, it is a pretty dreadful movie but...I liked the cast and all the costumes and...I don't know. I guess I just allowed myself to be entertained without even pretending to think it was brilliant. I never saw Ghost in the theatre, but I've caught it on cable a few times over the years. Yes, I think it is pretty darn bad, but again, I'm always entertained by it. Perhaps it's in the "so bad it's good" category? I don't know why I don't hate it, but I really don't. When Forrest Gump came out, I was quite a bit younger and not so discerning and I loved it at first. It seemed fresh to me and I loved seeing him worked into all those different points in history and I found his friends (especially Bubba) endearing. Never cared for Jenny, but...you know. I thought it was cute. Then I read the book and it was so horrible that it made me not like the movie so much. I haven't had the urge to watch Forrest Gump in years, even on cable. I guess it didn't stand the test of time with me, but I sure liked it when it was in the theatre.

I didn't like Philadelphia when I saw it in the theatre. I guess I couldn't really relate? I caught it again a couple of years ago in a class I was interpreting and I enjoyed it a little more when coming from the perspective of someone who is a few years older than I had been when it first came out, but it still didn't wow me--and yes, the message was a bit hard to miss.

These are all movies that can be disliked with good cause, but are they really the worst? I mean, I was forced to watch Little Nicky against my will during a summer school class I was interpreting a few years ago and that was truly one of the worst things I've ever seen and I'm still horrified by how it made my skin crawl with its badness. To me, that's what can be classified as "worst" movie. The others seem more like overrated and overpriced blockbusters that weren't as good as the audience seemed to think they were. To THAT kind of list, I would add American Beauty and Braveheart. Hated them both, but I'm sure they're not in any "worst" movie category.

[Deleted]

housemouse said:

divinemrse said:

And I'm probably going to get heat for this, but ..... Freedomland. I love Ron but I hated the movie. I mean an overdose on cough syrup? Hey, maybe it can happen, who knows, but the whole idea of it was stupid and the movie was disappointing, with the exception of Ron's five minute cameo appearance!

It pains me to say this, but I agree with you. Of course Ron's five minutes were brilliant, but the rest of the movie is sheer crap. Way too long and Julianne Moore overacted like crazy.

TOTALLY!!!!!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

and cough syurp??

[hoosier]

divinemrse said:

housemouse said:

It pains me to say this, but I agree with you. Of course Ron's five minutes were brilliant, but the rest of the movie is sheer crap. Way too long and Julianne Moore overacted like crazy.

TOTALLY!!!!!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

and cough syurp??

I also agree. I know I will be disappointed if I happen to read a book before I see the movie because they always mutilate it. Freedomland was a great read. I know that they have to edit like crazy to fit a two to three hour time slot but they left out so much that was really essential to the plot that I hardly recognized it as the same material! They totally eliminated the reporter and I felt that the ending was rushed, that they were trying to just wrap it up. And the suicide at the end of the book, where was it? And having everyone believe it was the cough syrup? Come on!!! Ron, however, did save it for me. Too bad they didn't have more of him. Thank heavens he didn't make his appearance in baggy shorts and flip-flops as the character did in the novel--though I am certain he has very nice legs!

One reaaalllyyy bad movie is Firebirds with Nicholas Cage and Tommy Lee Jones. I went mainly because of Tommy Lee who was the only saving grace of this movie. Talk about stupid! Yuck!!! Ninety minutes ill spent.

I happen to like Forrest Gump and Ghost. I root everytime the bad guy gets dragged down by the evil enities who lurk in the shadows.

[carl1951]

If it's a Fellini; it's bad.

I remember sitting through 3 Fellini movies. It was the longest, the worst and I didn't understand them even with the subtitles in English.

What an assault on the senses.

Later, Carl

[housemouse]

admin said:

These are all movies that can be disliked with good cause, but are they really the worst? I mean, I was forced to watch Little Nicky against my will during a summer school class I was interpreting a few years ago and that was truly one of the worst things I've ever seen and I'm still horrified by how it made my skin crawl with its badness. To me, that's what can be classified as "worst" movie. The others seem more like overrated and overpriced blockbusters that weren't as good as the audience seemed to think they were. To THAT kind of list, I would add American Beauty and Braveheart. Hated them both, but I'm sure they're not in any "worst" movie category.

Great point. I mentioned movies I personally hated and thought were over rated. Worst movies are a different category all to themselves.

As for a movie that is just plain bad, how about Cocktail? Although it has been said over and over, Heaven's Gate is truly an awful movie, there is one that lives up to its hype. Its negative hype.