Mark Vader Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 I never did address the topic at hand. For Worst major motion picture, you can not really look any further than "Jaws: The Revenge", although "Jaws 3-D" is craptacular too. But those are obvious choices that are easy to make. On a more personal level, one of the worst movies I have ever seen was "Point Break". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 On a more personal level, one of the worst movies I have ever seen was "Point Break". I didn't see it but tennis never seems to translate well on film. Most sports do, but for some reason not tennis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 I never did address the topic at hand. For Worst major motion picture, you can not really look any further than "Jaws: The Revenge", although "Jaws 3-D" is craptacular too. But those are obvious choices that are easy to make. On a more personal level, one of the worst movies I have ever seen was "Point Break". Did you like the remake when they replaced the surf boards with race cars and called it The Fast and the Furious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Jason X was pretty bad and so was Starship Troopers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Jason X was pretty bad and so was Starship Troopers Starship Troopers was definitely cheesy, but it was actually kind of entertaining I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Starship Troopers was definitely cheesy, but it was actually kind of entertaining I thought. Agreed - Starship Troopers was made to be a campy movie and to make fun of itself. It does a great job at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Most recent candidate for me would be "Grown Ups". With all the experienced comedic actors in this you would think that one of them would recognize a horrible script and alert the others. Maybe the paychecks were just to good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 (edited) Most recent candidate for me would be "Grown Ups". With all the experienced comedic actors in this you would think that one of them would recognize a horrible script and alert the others. Maybe the paychecks were just to good. I don't think it's an issue of the paychecks being too big (though I am sure James and Sandler did well with that flick) I think it's more a weird byproduct of success. By that I mean the industry here is designed to say no to people. Literally thousands of scripts are written and submitted each year yet only around 200 movies are made a year (if that). While a large percentage of those thousands of scripts are dreadful, there are plenty that are great. However they get passed over because whoever wrote it either doesn't have enough credits or there is not enough heat attached to the project. But then, once you become established as a moneymaker things change. Suddenly everything you write or do is read with less scrutiny. Suddenly it's easy for people to say yes, even to so-so scripts because they know the project will make money based on who's attached. Not saying that's what happened with Grownups ... But I think it's probably the result of the studio wanting to make a Sandler summer comedy regardless of the state of the material. Which means there's was probably less development done (sometimes this is a great thing) and it was more of a "write by numbers" approach. Could be wrong though. Edited May 20, 2011 by tgreg99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 (edited) I could agree that Forrest Gump is among the most overrated movies, but overall worst? No fuggin' way. At the very least, it was well acted. On that merit alone, it can't possibly be the worst major motion picture. My vote is for a recent one, Meet the Fockers. The worst part is that it's a franchise filled to the brim with good actors. I think they must have all gotten a collective brain aneurysm 5 minutes before accepting their roles once again. Absolutely disagree, Pete. Is there a lot of contrived crap? Absolutely. But if you're willing to do the legwork in terms of research, there's still a ton of good cinema out there. Most things with Ben Stiller are weak, unless he has a minor role. That dude obviously has a great agent to keep getting the juiciest comedy roles. I also found it really offensive how he openly mocked war veterans who lost limb in "Tropic Thunder." Edited May 20, 2011 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 (edited) Key: Liked Unimpressed/Indifferent Hated Haven't seen Just my opinion. Joe, I thought I stood alone on "The Swan" If there was a thread started on the most overrated movie it would be #1. I think it was laughably pretentious at times. Ending made me smile as well. Just all around underwhelming story. You should watch "Let The Right One In" or even "Let Me In". Both very good Edited May 20, 2011 by Dante Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Two of the most horrendous major movies I can think of right now are "Batman & Robin" (agree with previous poster -- this one was just so god-awful it hurts) and "Anaconda". "Deep Blue Sea" is right up there with them, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Agreed - Starship Troopers was made to be a campy movie and to make fun of itself. It does a great job at that. Which in and of itself sucks because the novel was epic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 (edited) Two of the most horrendous major movies I can think of right now are "Batman & Robin" (agree with previous poster -- this one was just so god-awful it hurts) and "Anaconda". "Deep Blue Sea" is right up there with them, too. I don't remember watching "Deep Blue Sea" but I did see the two others. I agree they are bad. Definitely in the bottom 10%. At a certain point, a movie is so bad its good. Have you ever checked out some of the movies made for the Syfy channel? This movie is a little piece of Hollywood gold. Casting is spot on. Special effects alone would be worth paying for. I don't think it's an issue of the paychecks being too big (though I am sure James and Sandler did well with that flick) I think it's more a weird byproduct of success. By that I mean the industry here is designed to say no to people. Literally thousands of scripts are written and submitted each year yet only around 200 movies are made a year (if that). While a large percentage of those thousands of scripts are dreadful, there are plenty that are great. However they get passed over because whoever wrote it either doesn't have enough credits or there is not enough heat attached to the project. But then, once you become established as a moneymaker things change. Suddenly everything you write or do is read with less scrutiny. Suddenly it's easy for people to say yes, even to so-so scripts because they know the project will make money based on who's attached. Not saying that's what happened with Grownups ... But I think it's probably the result of the studio wanting to make a Sandler summer comedy regardless of the state of the material. Which means there's was probably less development done (sometimes this is a great thing) and it was more of a "write by numbers" approach. I think this is it. Sandler+two or three SNL alums=$$$$ no matter what the movie is like Edited May 20, 2011 by Dante Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted May 21, 2011 Share Posted May 21, 2011 Joe, I thought I stood alone on "The Swan" If there was a thread started on the most overrated movie it would be #1. I think it was laughably pretentious at times. Ending made me smile as well. Just all around underwhelming story. That's honestly how I expected to feel about the Swan, but I ended up loving it. I have absolutely no interest in ballet, but the movie wasn't really about that at all. I thought the acting was stellar and the direction was brilliant. I know a lot of people who didn't care for it, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 That's honestly how I expected to feel about the Swan, but I ended up loving it. I have absolutely no interest in ballet, but the movie wasn't really about that at all. I thought the acting was stellar and the direction was brilliant. I know a lot of people who didn't care for it, though. I think that's what Darren Aronofsky was going for too. It's not a movie as much as it's art. If everyone loved it I think he'd say it didn't turn out the way he wanted. There are very few people that can get away with walking that line and still being relevant in the studio system -- which is why I think he didn't stick as the director for Wolverine. He's talented enough to do the big budget tent pole movies, but I don't think he has the desire to have to compromise his vision as he would inevitably be forced to do on a big studio picture. He wouldn't have nearly as much control or freedom as either Jackman, or the the producers or the studio would hold all the creative leverage. Some can walk that line though and do the "one for me, one for them" mentality, but I don't think he's one of em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 I think that's what Darren Aronofsky was going for too. It's not a movie as much as it's art. If everyone loved it I think he'd say it didn't turn out the way he wanted. There are very few people that can get away with walking that line and still being relevant in the studio system -- which is why I think he didn't stick as the director for Wolverine. He's talented enough to do the big budget tent pole movies, but I don't think he has the desire to have to compromise his vision as he would inevitably be forced to do on a big studio picture. He wouldn't have nearly as much control or freedom as either Jackman, or the the producers or the studio would hold all the creative leverage. Some can walk that line though and do the "one for me, one for them" mentality, but I don't think he's one of em. He definitely earned my respect with this film. After I saw it, I started breaking it down in my head and the more I did the more I appreciated it. It's easy to dismiss a lot of it during the viewing, and at first I was close to doing just that, but then I sort of "got it" and became very into what was going on with Natalie's character. I thought it was really, really excellent film making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 Wife dragged me to The Bodyguard back when we were engaged. I walked out of it 20 minutes in. Worst. Movie. Ever. No way! The Bodyguard is one of my faves. I've watched it about a gazillion times. *LOL* Same with The Replacements and Bring It On. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 No way! The Bodyguard is one of my faves. I've watched it about a gazillion times. *LOL* Same with The Replacements and Bring It On. Taro T didn't speak of his wife in the past tense... He did walk out 20 minutes into the movie... AND (I assume) still got married and stayed married... She must have seen some "redeeming quality" in Taro! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced about which *major* motion pictures are the worst. To me, it really has to do with the amount put into the production, the expectations, and the quality of the work. Kind of like the ratio of the suckitude of a movie to the money and expectations that went into it. A flick that sucked badly, but had low expectations is not nearly as bad as a flick that sucked but had huge expectations. In that light, without question, the worst major motion pictures are the first three Star Wars prequels, and the second and third Matrix movies. I can't even begin to describe just how bad the writing and acting are in Star Wars 1-3. It embarrassingly bad. The plot lines are confusing and nonsensical, and the dialogue is horrendous. No acting could turn those scripts into something respectable, but it didn't matter, because the acting sucked. But given how high the expectations were for these flicks when they came out, the overall rank of suckitude had to be right at the top. And then you have Matrix 2 and 3. Another example of movies that took a cool idea and made the plot lines confusing and incomprehensible, along with dialogue that makes me want to retch every time I hear it. This is seriously some of the worst dialogue I can recall. This wouldn't be so bad if the movies didn't really take themselves so seriously, but I never got that sense from these movies. Add to this the fact that the acting was led -- no really, led -- by Keanu Reeves (can you really call it acting, anyway?) and you have some of the worst movies ever in the face of their great expectations and the amount that went into them. All that said, I still watch these whenever I see them on the tube. Why? I have no idea. Must be the special effects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced about which *major* motion pictures are the worst. To me, it really has to do with the amount put into the production, the expectations, and the quality of the work. Kind of like the ratio of the suckitude of a movie to the money and expectations that went into it. A flick that sucked badly, but had low expectations is not nearly as bad as a flick that sucked but had huge expectations. In that light, without question, the worst major motion pictures are the first three Star Wars prequels, and the second and third Matrix movies. I can't even begin to describe just how bad the writing and acting are in Star Wars 1-3. It embarrassingly bad. The plot lines are confusing and nonsensical, and the dialogue is horrendous. No acting could turn those scripts into something respectable, but it didn't matter, because the acting sucked. But given how high the expectations were for these flicks when they came out, the overall rank of suckitude had to be right at the top. And then you have Matrix 2 and 3. Another example of movies that took a cool idea and made the plot lines confusing and incomprehensible, along with dialogue that makes me want to retch every time I hear it. This is seriously some of the worst dialogue I can recall. This wouldn't be so bad if the movies didn't really take themselves so seriously, but I never got that sense from these movies. Add to this the fact that the acting was led -- no really, led -- by Keanu Reeves (can you really call it acting, anyway?) and you have some of the worst movies ever in the face of their great expectations and the amount that went into them. All that said, I still watch these whenever I see them on the tube. Why? I have no idea. Must be the special effects. You sir, make an excellent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts