It has happened to all of us. A film comes out, everyone gushes over it, our friends love it, the experts praise it. It is declared the defination of film as art, and you hate it. Not that you didn't get it, or it was in a genre you don't like. No, you got it, it was in a genre you generally like, there were no personal problems that kept you from enjoying it. You just didn't like it. And I mean 'didn't like it', not just 'it didn't move me'. I mean really didn't like it.

A few ground rules might help to keep it friendly.

#1 Everyone is a worthwhile person who has a right to his/her opinion. We love each other and nothing can ever change that. So no flaming.

#2 You can explain your choice as much, or as little, as you want.

#3 Other are not stupid for thier choices as you are not stupid for yours. So don't say that people who liked the film were morons. Remember to see rule one.

I'll start...

The Matrix - It failed for me at all levels. I didn't find the story compeling or interesting. I felt like it had been cobbled together after someone had read a primer on easter religion. I felt it was trying to be "deeper" than it really was. I hated it. I lied to everyone, pretended I thought it was cool, but in truth I never want to see another frame of that film again.

Okay, your turn...

Everytime I answer this question, I get attacked by others, but I'll go ahead and answer anyway because I'm used to it. The big disappointments with me aren't plain old movies that come out recently, its the ones that have been hyped up for years, the classic you-gotta-see-this movies, and the recent ones that win oodles of awards. There's nothing I can't stand more than a basic idea that was stretched into an entire movie - 10% creative, 90% filler.

#1 on my list is 2001: A Space Odyssey. Yes, it was cool that there was no audio/sound in space, but Stanley Kubrick had a tendancy to take 20 minutes to show a 2 minute scene in all of his movies. To me it seemed like he had an idea for a couple scenes, but stretched that into an entire, lengthy movie. My perfect example is, in 2001, when that guy is eating and reading the newspaper - took way too long in my opinion. I've also never understood the ending. To me, just because its weird, doesn't make it genius. But maybe I'm missing something.

#2 is anything by Ang Lee. Crouching Tiger won all kinds of awards, but I just couldn't bear watching it. I've always liked Chow Yun-Fat (not John Woo, but that's a different story) and was looking forward to those graceful, flying fight scenes. Plus I rather enjoy subtitled foriegn films so I thought it was a good idea. Man was I wrong. I spent the first hour trying to figure out which character was which because they all had the same haircut. Then, when I think the movie is about over... nope... they just got to the desert... two more hours to go.
Lee's version of The Hulk was an even bigger disappointment to me. The movie had excellent special effects, that's for sure. The comic has been around for years and has always been about a guy that gets angry and big and green, then tears stuff up. Pretty simple concept. The movie, however, was a love story. It was centered more around Jennifer Connelly's character than the Hulk. That just ruined it for me... and that's not even counting the editing.

I could ramble on about this for days, and probably make a lot of enemies in the process. However, I think it would be a good idea to stop for now :).

I love a real bad movie, one that's so stupid that it is comical, or that puts one to sleep. :-))

Which one? Er, 80% of them, though Mystery Science Theater 3000 had the best of them, plus the peanut gallery. :-))

I say (like *everyone* I know who has seen it) Matrix 3 was a big pile of dogs poo. It was so boring. I'm over that stylistic combat style, and they did hardly anything new as far as SFX go. Story was weak and I just don't buy the ending at all. I felt ripped off. What? The machine made a deal with the people....Oh yeah - ok. Maybe they'll explain it in Matrix 4,5 and 6...Cause I'm sure they'll do another trilogy.

For those who want to see a movie that's come out in the last several years that actually has a new and exciting form of fight scene, get out "Equilibrium" the final fight in the movie is worth getting it for. Refreshing stuff - and it's a good movie too.

5th element is another of my bad picks. It's been a long time since I've seen it but I remember that whole 'Love saves the world' thing which I thought was just stupid (And no, I'm not an anti love story film person, I actually really like good love stories) And I felt the costumes were just a bunch of art wank - who did them? Can't remember his name now but some famous designer.

I'm stopping here too..... ;)

Aaron

I'm going to say anything that has unmotived camera moves and horrible CG.

I saw a movie called, "Blackwood" (Michael Pare is in it as a sheriff) the other night. It was HORRIBLE on so many levels. The DP did handheld and made lots of camera moves for no good reason. Even my girlfriend was like, "What the hell is up with all the movment?" She never comments on that stuff.

If you can watch the scene in Blackwood when their in the basement and the main actor is on trial...it's so bad that I couldn't turn it off! Is that good or bad?

Murph

Titanic (http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Studio/1515/turan.htm). A Beautiful Mind (http://dir.salon.com/ent/movies/review/2001/12/21/beautiful_mind/index.html).

(For the latter, see also, if you can find it, Milan Paurich's review "Nash Rambler" from the Cleveland Free Times. Zingers from that one include "Since no one bothered revoking Howard’s Directors Guild membership after last year’s abysmal Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas, we’re treated to this latest turkey, possibly the most inept, and certainly the most offensive, of his career" and "...[Jennifer] Connelly channeling Demi Moore at her most tremulous...")

<<<-- it's so bad that I couldn't turn it off! Is that good or bad?
Murph -->>>

I´d like to comment on this a bit..

I saw this movie in the paralel showcase of Sitges Fantastic Movie Festival.
It´s a Filipinian movie from the 80´s called:

"She-man: Mistress of the Universe"...

It´s some weird parody of He-Man... but in a small shore town in Filipines... with a lot of transvestites, weird gags, and even weirder actors.. with very-very low budget FX... and very 80´s look... you get the picture..

It even has a weirdest storyline...
The thing had no subtitles (I don´t speak Filipino)... the sound was horrible and it was projected on a crappy ultra low-res screen.. I think it was probably downloaded from the internet..

But for some reason I couldn´t stand up and leave (it was free entrance too)...
This festival has a lot of horror flicks.. but this comedy gave more nightmares than when I saw the exorcist at 8.

From almost every point of view this is a Bad movie... but It´s going to stick in my mind forever...

For example... ask me If I remember something from Mission Impossible.... well there was Tom Cruise, and I had fun at the theatre.. but nothing more..

So I guess it´s like a circle... if a movie is so bad.. that they actually had to make a big effort to do it like that.. then it comes around and it´s not bad at all, because you are getting entertained.. isn´t that what most of the films are looking to do anyway?

(Hey.. like my beer philosophy?)

Federico,

You are so right! I believe the same thing - some of the most memorable experience at the movies were with bad movies.

My friends and I use to get roaring drunk before going into "bad" movies...like chick flicks. Just for fun we'd go in and cause trouble. I know that was bad...and on here I posted that I was going to try and stop that behaviour. But, hey...I was only 15!

Murph

The Waterboy. I actually like Adam Sandler, but man. There's like three jokes in that whole movie.

The Deer Hunter...
It won best friggen picture?!? WTF!?! My DVD fast forward button almost wore out. By the time they got to the russian roulette scene, I was ready to play along!

The worst part is that I bought this steamer on DVD. Anyone want to trade???

I actually liked the whole Matrix trilogy, especalliy since I started
reading more into all kinds of stuff. I didn't like all of it, but mostly
I did.

Aaron: I have the same with the 5th element. Everybody seems
to like it. Except for me (well, us then, heh).

Oh oh... I also really disliked eXistenZ and the Thirteenth Floor
(now that I'm talking about SF anyway), wow that was bad.

Oh yeah, I nearly forgot my most hated movie of all time...
Daredevil
Ugh! Even typing it makes me want to hurl...

Anything by Kubrick. I'm sorry; I never have gotten it.

Anything by John Woo; I mean, I like a few of the films for film sake, but overall, I can't believe this guy is a succesful director. His action scenes remind me of The A Team.

The Matrix films; don't hate it, definatley don't love it. Just not as wowed as everyone else I guess. It's okay, and that's it.

Anything by Renny Harlin; see John Woo comment above.

Anything by Robert Rodriguez; I know, props to El Mariachi and the success story; but I think he is sooooooooo overrated.

Kevin Smith; I love his films in terms of dialog, but think he can't direct his way out of a paper hat. I think he is a kick arse screenwriter, but should stick to writing.

I´ll jump in again...
What´s up with Gangs of New York? I mean where is the hour that is missing?

Big dissappointment... I like very much every Martin´s movies I´ve seen.
I like Daniel Day Lewis... I´d like to direct him some time..
I like Di Caprio... (yes I think he is a very good actor)..
I even liked Cameron Diaz in this one...

But where the F@#% is the rest of the movie? There has to be more somewhere..

Well I hope they come up with a special Extended-Director´sCut version soon...

Big Fish

...didn't like it- plain and simple!

<<<-- Originally posted by Dylan Couper : The Deer Hunter...
It won best friggen picture?!? WTF!?! My DVD fast forward button almost wore out. By the time they got to the russian roulette scene, I was ready to play along!

The worst part is that I bought this steamer on DVD. Anyone want to trade??? -->>>

I see your point and do not know your age. For me (being 33) it is before my time. I see the importance of the film in terms of subject matter, but wonder outloud why it won best picture, especially when it went up against Heaven Can Wait and the epic Midnight Express.

It is hard not to like anything with Walken though.

I hated both of the matrix sequels. And I've gotten into countless arguments with my friends over them.

There is that old saying, don't let the effects get in the way of the story. However, I don't mind going to see a light show with all kinds of crazy effects. For instance, I found Spiderman very entertaining, even though the story was pretty hackneyed and the film wasn't especially deep. I think for some of these newer action flicks, particular the matrix sequels, the saying should go, don't let the story get in the way of the effects.

Of course, the best movies blend a good story with effects that enhance the relationships and action between the characters.

Oh yeah, I also didn't like any of the Kubrick movies until Eyes Wide Shut, and I take a lot of flak for that...

[edit] I did love "The Shining" though...

Was it just me or did the scene in MATRIX RELOADED with ZION seem like a MUSIC VIDEO? Horrible stuff.

Movies like "Deerhunter" require a deeper understanding of what was going on with regards to Vietnam, the returning home of vets, etc. as well as what viewing audiences were used to seeing at the time of its release.

Same goes with an old classic "The Best Years of Our Lives". Most people I know simply hate it. But to sit down and to listen to someone who lived through WWII, and who had lived through the censorship of the era, gives you an idea of why it was so important then.

Completely agree.

The wife and I absolutely loathed Chicago. I'm nuts about musicals, and the singing and dancing were great and all, but there wasn't one single character that had any redeeming value. Loved the music; hated the story.

Everybody I know who has seen Sean Penn's The Pledge has hated it, yet it's one of my all-time favorites and a great role for Nicholson.

Unfortunately I rented Legally Blonde 2 before I read any reviews on it. The absolute worst piece of crap to come out of Hollyweird in a long, long time.

Spending my hard earned money and being subjected to a 90 minute PETA commercial was more than I can stand. I could have forgiven that had the story been any good. The movie was so full of itself and so impressed with it's own cuteness, I wanted to gag. Add the insulting side story about gay rights and this thing gets peice of sh#t award for the decade.

I was so insulted and angry I wrote down the names of the lead actress, screen writer and director in order to boycott anything they are involved in for the forceable future.

PETA!? I'd never heard of that until you just wrote it. Ha! Man, I've been away from the States too long. You guys must never get bored.

The only movie I've ever walked out on was "Dune"...and the only reason I didn't walk out of "Holy Moses" was because it was pouring cats and dogs outside (which might have been a sign from above concerning that film). Of recent movies, though...I'd have to say "Dude, where's my car?" gets the double thumbs down.

John, those lowlifes even compared eating pork to Christ dying on the cross. There is absulutely nothing beneath them. They will sink to any depth.

Joe,

Really...I'm not casting any judgements about PETA or whatever acronym is targeted these days. It's just that it's not until you've lived outside the States for a long time does it strike you how comically self righteous the US can be. I sometimes think the name should be changed to "The United States of My Opinion is Always More Important Than Yours"... with bumper stickers that read "Let Freedom Ring: But I'll hunt you and your family down if you oppose my way of thinking." Amazing how low the tolerance level is.

And speaking of low tolerance (to get the thread back on track), I'm amazed by big budget films with low production values. I always try to find some redeeming qualities in a film, simply because a LOT of people contributed to it in different ways. Consequently, there's rarely a case where there aren't some redeeming qualities. But I'll never understand how larger budget films are released with mic booms dipping into the scene, etc. I realize that that's usually a TV vs. screen cropping issue, but if they're filming in 4:3, shouldn't they use a transparent mask so they can see where the mic will be in both screen and TV versions? And don't the replays show the mic? And what about gross continuity problems? Inexcusable for big budget films.

Things like that are what make me label a film as "bad"...more so than the story and/or acting.

Sometimes visible mic booms are the faults of projectionists' bad framing. If a mic boom gets on the film but outside the safe zone in an otherwise best take of a shot, that take is rarely discarded.

If you spot a mic on a DVD of a new film, for which the framing was the responsibility of the filmmakers themselves, then it's a blunder!

That's what I'm referring to, Robert... DVD and TV broadcasts of films. Ever see "Slingblade" on TV? Count the number of times you see the mic.

I'll check it out!

Speaking of production values...

I was watching A FEW GOOD MEN recently and there are a couple scenesin the court room where the lighting is just soooo bad. I mean, you can literally see HMI City and the whites are soooo blown out its just weird. And then magically it gets better.

It was painfully obvious that the lighting was way to hot.

"I Shot Andy Warhol"
"Transylvania 65000"
"Drop Dead Fred"

Julien Donkey-Boy. Very disturbing. Filmed in digital video (natch) with alot of the work being done in post.

I love "artsy" movies... but this was one that tried too hard to be "artsy". It overdoses on "bizarre".

One famous name... Chloe Sevigny.

"Battle Field Earth" hands down the worst movie I've ever seen. The only one I ever asked for my money back.

And got it.

I've never walked out on a movie, but I came close to walking out on "To Die For" and "Natural Born Killers". I would have if I had not gone with other people.

I found a new ultimate worst movie ever.

It's called "Latin Kingz". I rented it because I saw a trailer on another cheesy B movie, and it looked so bad I couldn't not rent it.

It truly was the wost steaming pile of excrement of a "film" I've ever seen. I honestly thought it was a highschool video 101 project, until I watched the featurette and it was directed by a real grown up adult male and actually had a crew of adult people.

Plus I've never seen a feature film that was shot 100% without any lighting at all. Even Blair Witch Project had flashlights... It might have been an experiment in backlighting though, who knows.

It was so bad I watched the first 15 minutes then hit the FF button on the DVD player and watched the rest in 60x speed.

On the other hand, it was a great inspiration, since if they could get that into a video store, I should have no trouble.


The worst part, their "second unit camera" was an XL1. Shame.... I wont be listing it as "movies made with an XL1" anytime soon. The main camera was an unidentified shoulderbrick. Maybe VHS, because the quality was terrible, worse than the 2nd unit stuff.

How about movies that are painful to watch, like Liquid Sky, Eraserhead or Naked Lunch. These films have their artistic merits yet subject us to a sensory beating.

The more visceral films of David Cronenberg also make me pretty uncomfortable.

Michael

Gaaawwwwd!!!! LIQUID SKY! I forgot all about that flick!

Verrrry strange. Artsy, yes. That is the type of movie that you want to smoke some sort of illegal substance before viewing it.

The matrix's story was definitely off, but the SFX were amazing. The 100 smith scene--there is nothing like it. And the water explosions at the end of revolutions were stunning. Unfortunately the plot.....

Worst of all time in my book-
Gangs of New York- he cut some meat and what...???
That space movie with the bugs a few years back. Cant remember name..
Battlefield Earth
Basic- either really good and I'm stupid or they couldnt think of an ending so they just made 1500 twists.
A Tigger Movie and Godzilla 2000- not sure why I went to these, but they stand as the only movies i have ever walked out of.
Charlies Angels- Only movie I have ever fallen asleep in- and i wasnt tired

on the other hand i really liked Dude Where's my car. subtle comic genious IMO.

Hey, don't be dissin' one of the best stories of all time---The Matrix. I admit not caring for the second one when I saw it but once I realized its tie in with the other two, awesome. Perfect ending to a perfect story. Amazing.

<<<-- Originally posted by Jonathan Stanley :
That space movie with the bugs a few years back. Cant remember name..[/quote]
You better not be talking about Starship Troopers, or I'll find you and make you take it back in person!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)




A Tigger Movie and Godzilla 2000- not sure why I went to these, but they stand as the only movies i have ever walked out of.
-->>>

Do you mean just "Godzilla", with Matt Broderick? Not "Godzilla 2000", I hope, since it was only released to video in North America. G2000 was very enjoyable for me as an original Godzilla fan, as it was in the classic style, but the Broderick version was terrible. Worse than terrible. Even with Jean Reno.

Not sure aobut Tigger Movie, but the sequel to Lilo and Stitch sucked. I stopped watching it.

Anyway, compared to Latin Kingz, all these movies are Citizen Kane.

YESSS Starship Troopers!!!! AHHHHH I hated that movie with passion. Sorry it just didnt click with me or something.

I did mean the Broderick version of the film. I forgot about the Japanese version that was actually called Godzilla 2000, or i got them confused or something. That version was entertaining just because i think the japanese are halarious (in a good way).

As for the Matrix plot in the sequels, what bothers me most is not that they were so bad, it just that they tried to force it IMO. They always said they had the trilogy in their minds from day one--they didnt. They and George Lucas could have a "lets make up a sequel on the spot" party. (Or prequel)

All three did tie together. In fact, The second rolls right into the third without stopping and unless you saw the second you wouldn't understand the start of the third.

About Schmitt,

I forced myself to watch the first 20 minutes and when I just couldn't stand it any longer I hit max FF. I was somehow hoping to find a spot in the movie that looked good, but every time I stopped the FF I was sorry. One of the only movies I absolutely could not stand.

Two films by Frank Darabont, based upon Stephen King stories:

The Shawshank Redemption,
The Green Mile

Both of these are the most mawkish, contrived films that attempted to be about something SERIOUS that I've ever seen. I've had friends come up to me and their eyes get misty when they talk about that film. And I bite my tongue.

Definition of "mawkish":
1. bathetic, drippy, hokey, maudlin, mawkish, mushy, schmaltzy, schmalzy, sentimental, slushy -- (effusively or insincerely emotional; "a bathetic novel"; "maudlin expressons of sympathy"; "mushy effusiveness"; "a schmaltzy song"; "sentimental soap operas"; "slushy poetry")

I reserve most of my hatred for the second film which features what some call "the Magic Negro". This is a character whose only purpose is to provide some kind of lesson, advice or contrivance to the other characters. Michael Clarke Duncan's character (nothing wrong with his acting) is literally the magic negro. He has no real depth in his character, he is just there to help the other characters along. He could have been an alien and angel or any other sort of supernatural character who doesn't really have a motive or own desire. His purpose is there to serve the other people. Yet, The Green Mile is supposed to have some sort of message about the death penalty but there is nothing about the character to indicate he is even alive.

The Shawshank Redemption was like The Green Mile without the magic negro. Like the Green Mile it seemed to be an exercise in period photography. All the 'meaningful' scenes were ratched up with an excess of sentiment just in case the audience didn't get that there was some sort of injustice or turn of the character. The bad characters were extremely evil, the good characters were saints. The plot movements could be seen coming from miles away.

I know a lot of people who hated "Starship Troopers" until they were told that it was actually a satire. Some of Paul Verhoven's American works are satires on the society he works in. "Robocop" was the most blatant example until "Starship Troopers" came along. I laughed from beginning to end. It's quite likely that some of the studio executives didn't get it either.

Keith you dont like Shawshank? Im speechless. Its okay I guess; my sister in law doesnt like Braveheart.

I don't like Braveheart either. I like battle movies. I like historical movies. But Braveheart also fell under the definition of mawkish. And the battle scenes, while under the veneer of authenticity, were uninspiring. Flat, linear direction. It doesn't inspire me to see The Passion of the Christ based upon Gibson's previous directing effort.

Another bad Gibson movie in which he starred was The Patriot which had me aghast at how cliches could be trundled out in such a lazy fashion.

Yep. Hated The Patriot.

"All three did tie together. In fact, The second rolls right into the third without stopping and unless you saw the second you wouldn't understand the start of the third."

The gap isn't between the second and third film (which were written, a la Back to the Future Part 2 and Part 3, as one too-long story and delivered as two separate movies)--it's between the first film and its sequels.

There are so many plot holes, errors of science, misconceptions of philosophy and psychology in those films, and really only mediocre action to boot, since there was little suspense to any of the peripatetic fight sequences (especially in the sequels).

I think I know why the sequels failed to resonate with audiences as the first film did--if anyone wants to hear my theory.

Top Recent Awful Movies:

Starship Troopers - To me it didn't satirize society, it satirzed the book from which it was drawn.

Pearl Harbor - Holy moses, what were they thinking?

We Were Soldiers - An incredible book, botched by Sir Mel. The utterly unbelievable, yes, mawkish ending mady me want to puke. And the title! "We were soldiers once, and young" says something about a lost youth, marred by war while
"We were soldiers" says simply, Duh.

Daredevil - Maybe we can pay Ben Affleck to never be in another movie ever again. Ever.

Natural Born Killers - I read somewhere that the original store was written by Quentin Tarentino, but after he saw what Oliver Stone did with it, he asked to not be given a writing credit. I don't blame him a bit.

Robert,

Personally I'm burned out trying to explain it all to the unclean masses.

:)