The worse movie you've ever seen

Bloodrayne, bad acting, directing, horrible story, its got the bad movie combo plate

Zomby Woof wrote:

HiTempguy wrote: And the movie itself is supposed to be ridiculous. I think a lot of people are having trouble in this thread distinguishing between movies that are truly awful (poor acting, poor directing, poor dialogue, poor story) and movies that are meant to be stupid or funny or campy. There is a huge difference, and anybody should be able to recognize these things.

I think you're right about that, and also noticed that when some people see a movie that's more realistic, and less Hollywood glitz, they mistake it for either lousy acting or being poorly made.

I liked Rocky Horror for being campy and silly, that's what it was meant to be. Therefore the director producer etc succeeded and it's a good movie. It's when something like Alien Resurrection is made that fails miserably despite having lavish amounts of money and an all star talented cast shoveled at it that I consider it to be a bad movie.

Having said that, I have been known to watch a bad movie or two. [blush]I actually own DVD's of Waterworld and Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome.[/blush]

Thunderdome falls into bad movie territory? Who knew?

Having fixed aircraft for a number of years.

ANY berkeleying movie which features an "explosive decompression scene".

Somehow an aircraft has millions of cubic feet of air inside that just keeps rushing on out, sucking passengers, seats and anything else out as the cabin air pressure reaches outside air pressure incredibly slowly.

Seriously folks, there will be a bit of whooshing and it will be over, put on your o2 mask before you pass out.

As a wingnut, don't get me started. All those sniper rifle in a helicopter scenes? Total BS.

Trans_Maro, maybe they picture this?

In reply to Appleseed:

Yes, that I can understand.

A guy getting sucked out of a hole the size of my fist because of a ~5psi differential... Come on...

Even if it were outside the atmosphere, it's 15psi, slap your checklist clipboard over the hole while you think of something better to use.

That gets you irritated, how about the entire ending of the GI Joe movie a few years back?

...the climax of the movie is when the arctic ice cap breaks up and the icebergs sink to the bottom of the ocean, smashing the enemy base. I actually jumped off the couch yelling at the TV during that one.

Just watched Anchorman 2. This was supposed to be a comedy? I only laughed ONCE during the entire movie.

Trans_Maro wrote: Having fixed aircraft for a number of years. ANY berkeleying movie which features an "explosive decompression scene". Somehow an aircraft has millions of cubic feet of air inside that just keeps rushing on out, sucking passengers, seats and anything else out as the cabin air pressure reaches outside air pressure incredibly slowly. Seriously folks, there will be a bit of whooshing and it will be over, put on your o2 mask before you pass out.

Someone watched World War Z recently.

I liked the Antonov that took off from the aircraft carrier, then changed into a C-130 and back a few times.

Appleseed wrote: Thunderdome falls into bad movie territory? Who knew?

Who didn't know? It's terrible.

Curmudgeon wrote:

Zomby Woof wrote:

HiTempguy wrote: And the movie itself is supposed to be ridiculous. I think a lot of people are having trouble in this thread distinguishing between movies that are truly awful (poor acting, poor directing, poor dialogue, poor story) and movies that are meant to be stupid or funny or campy. There is a huge difference, and anybody should be able to recognize these things.

I think you're right about that, and also noticed that when some people see a movie that's more realistic, and less Hollywood glitz, they mistake it for either lousy acting or being poorly made.

I liked Rocky Horror for being campy and silly, that's what it was meant to be. Therefore the director producer etc succeeded and it's a good movie. It's when something like Alien Resurrection is made that fails miserably despite having lavish amounts of money and an all star talented cast shoveled at it that I consider it to be a bad movie. Having said that, I have been known to watch a bad movie or two. [blush]I actually own DVD's of Waterworld and Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome.[/blush]

The thing about Rocky Horror is that how good it is depends entirely open where/how you see it. Watch it by yourself or with someone else who's not seen it before, and yeah- it's just not that good.

Now- go see it in a theater are one of the many midnight showings of it around the country (and the world) and it's a WHOOOLE different ball of wax- the audience participation and callbacks make it WAY more fun. It's like being inside a MST3K episode.

An interesting bookend to this thread, at least for me- what started this whole thing was A Million Ways to Die in the West, and the review and commentary given made it sounds horrible, disgusting, and unfunny. Which meant I was more than a bit wary (and surprised, given it was NOT what I was expecting...) when the couple SWMBO and I had a planned movie & dinner outing planned with for yesterday decided it was the movie they wanted to see. SWMBO was shown the first post of this thread and was similarly warned/wary- but was figuring that if nothing else watching the other couple's reaction would be amusing.

Honestly though- none of us found it nearly as bad as the OP described it (though there was undeniably a bit too much sheep penis). There's nothing particularly inaccurate about the descriptions of the scenes- but the descriptions completely miss the situation and the comedy of what's going on as pretty much any dry description would. If you tried to describe the funniest scenes in Blazing Saddles in a similar manner, it would also come off as horrible and unfunny. And don't get me wrong- there was a LOT of gross humor in this movie, anything starring, directed by, and written by Seth McFarlane is GOING to have a lot of gross humor. But most of it actually worked quite well. Some things got taken just a bit too far- but that's SOP of McFarlane, he likes finding the line where you cross over into bad taste and making sure he ends up at least a little bit over that line. The hat-crapping scene was a perfect example of this- we were ROLLING with laughter for most of it, especially the interlude of him trying to grab the second one and the wearer swatting his hand away repeatedly, but then winced and went, "Ewww" when he kicked the hat over at the end.

It was no Blazing Saddles- nothing could or ever will be- but it also wouldn't end up on my list of wor(se/st) movies either, as obviously all of this is up to individual taste (or lack thereof )

Good point. Expecting a great movie, or horrible movie can have a big impact on your experience.

As an example of this, I once saw a movie knowing nothing about it. The result was great. That movie was The Terminator.

Along similar lines, also the reason I hate to see trailers. They can really destroy the experience of a movie.

Speaking of bad movies, I like South Park. But the South Park movie sucked. Badly. The premise (censorship) was OK but the execution was awful.

The Razor's Edge with Bill Murray. A WW1 movie that the studio let him make in exchange for doing Ghostbusters. A horrible movie and Murray really, really sucked in it. A dramatic role that he played almost entirely like his character in Caddyshack. You were always waiting for the punchline and then saying-- oh, this is serious? Wikipedia says the movie cost $12M to make and grossed $6M.

aircooled wrote: Along similar lines, also the reason I hate to see trailers. They can really destroy the experience of a movie.

I have mixed feelings on trailers. I love the ART of making a good trailer- getting the audience captivated and interested in seeing the movie in a short stretch is definitely an art itself, and when done well they can be GREAT.

But far too many movies these days show you the entire movie and give everything away in the trailer. Why should I go see the movie if you're going to show me everything that happens and all the best scenes in 90 seconds?

Sadly the art of making a trailer is to get people into the theater, not to have them enjoy the movie as much as possible.

aussiesmg wrote: I dare any of you to watch "Shaolin Soccer" and argue anything is actually worse

That movie was funny. I can think of many worse movies.

Okay, actually I'm thinking of Kung Fu Hustle which was by the same guys. I can't remember if Shaolin Soccer was funny or not but Kung Fu Hustle is funny enough to carry two movies. I love watching "different" stuff, and it definitely qualifies.

I don't think I saw this in the thread, but how was Super Mario Bros.: The Movie not mentioned???

I only saw this movie once. Back in 1993, my friend Evan was turning 11 and had his birthday party at the movie theater. We were awaiting the release of this movie for months... and it came out the weekend of his birthday. We were pumped! The date was set, and all of my friends and I went to see this movie with Evan for his b-day.

A little over an hour and a half later, we emerged from the theater completely dazed, confused, and disappointed. I still don't understand what happened during that hour and a half of my life. It had basically NOTHING to do with the source material (not like the source material would translate well to the big screen, but you get the point).

Truly AWFUL movie.

I disliked both Pearl Harbor and Titanic. I didn't like the fact that they were turned into love stories. Pear Harbor I just turned off and Titanic I skipped to the sinking.

I really like Nothing but Trouble, Waterworld, and several others mentioned in this thread.

Also, I liked Nothing But Trouble. I thought it was strange, but funny in a weird way.

Nothing But Trouble was nothing but Heathers 20 years later, with 20 years older (and dumber) characters, and 15 years after Heathers stopped being cool and anti-whatever.

Big Trouble in Little China was complete dreck. But it's so bad that you can't help but watch the damn thing. I'll never understand how it got a 78 rottentomatoes.com rating.

The Secret of the Ooze was terrible, but it turns out that there was a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III 'Turtles in Time' film that's even worse.

Curmudgeon wrote: Big Trouble in Little China was complete dreck. But it's so bad that you can't help but watch the damn thing. I'll never understand how it got a 78 rottentomatoes.com rating.

Eh? Big Trouble in Little China is a RIOT. It's one of those that is intentionally playing all the tropes to their best. All the more once you realize that Kurt Russell's character is pretty much the classic sidekick but believes he's actually the hero.