General Discussions

the worst movie you've ever seen

POSTED BY: RionaEire
UPDATED: Wednesday, May 1, 2013 03:14
VIEWED: 20282
PAGE 7 of 10

ZEEK

Wednesday, January 18, 2012 5:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Ill agree wholeheartedly that it was the wrost of the series. Maybe even from an emotional standpoint, I could agree its the biggest filmgoing dissapointment ive had. But objectively, I still find it a better constructed film overall than dreck like Transformers 2 (I skipped 3) or more recently, Green Lantern.

I skipped both Transformers 2 and 3. So, I can't comment on those. Transformers 1 was bad enough, but still not to the level of Episode I. As for Green Lantern I didn't think it was nearly as bad as the reviewers claim. It was a standard super hero movie.

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, January 18, 2012 6:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
As for Green Lantern I didn't think it was nearly as bad as the reviewers claim. It was a standard super hero movie.

I agree. Trite script, pretty clean direction, good standard FX. I had fun with it.

The laughing Chrisisall

TATERTOT

Wednesday, January 18, 2012 9:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
No, it's not the old family homestead or something. I just don't think something that sucks that hard is movie fodder. Reflecting and exaggerating the dullness of life to the point where actors don't change facial expressions and speak in grating monotone? Not entertaining.

Rose did you know that there is going to be an animated Napoleon Dynamite show on fox? :P

TWO

Wednesday, January 18, 2012 10:23 PM

The Lost Tribe is the worst. www.imdb.com/title/tt0811124/

It is because of Firefly that this is my worst movie. The Lost Tribe is a remake of Jewel Staite's The Forgotten Ones www.imdb.com/title/tt1308169/

The producer of both these movies, Mohit Ramchandani www.imdb.com/name/nm1186058/ was so proud of his concept of shipwreck survivors running from man-eating troglodytes that he made the movie twice.

What was Ramchandani thinking? No one knows, but he did complain when Jewel Staite wouldn't break her contract with Stargate Atlantis and return to work for him at reduced salary on movie version 2.0. So he showed Jewel who was boss and recast her part. Ramchandani was rumored to have announced his executive decision: “Jewel, now everyone is fired except for the guys in the monkey costumes!” (He was referring to the stuntmen.)

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity," where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

PHOENIXROSE

Wednesday, January 18, 2012 10:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Ah. See, that's part of what I thought was good about it.

Yes, I did understand that. I was stating why I disagree. Making a deliberately sucky movie about something that sucks isn't clever, and it isn't funny. For example, a film that tried to make a point about social isolation by having all the dialogue in it be, "Uuhhhhhhhhh... uhhhhh... uhhhhhh." would not be entertaining on any level. There are better ways to do that sort of thing than deliberate suck-ness.

I stand by my stance that Napolean Dynamite is the worst film I've ever seen. My second vote would probably go to Jonah Hex (which I did walk out of, having learned my lesson.)

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, January 18, 2012 10:39 PM

Well, I dunno, there's these whole tropes about Kafka Comedy and Stylistic Suck, and works made using one or both can be pretty entertaining. But it depends on the person. Someone else might find such a movie offensive, depressing, or annoying.

DREAMTROVE

Thursday, January 19, 2012 1:37 AM

Okay. Questions:

Was that Bond girl Tanya Roberts riding an actual zebra?

Xanadu looks so cheesy it almost makes me want to see it. Almost. What's holding me back is the previewer is clearly avoiding showing me any of the actual film. Still, it can't possibly be as atrocious as "Fame."

Oh, the Henderson monster isn't entertainly bad, it's just really truly unbearably boring. Take the seventies contemplative nothingness movie and square it. Another good example is "Q: The Winged Serpent" but Q is actually mildly entertaining because there is an actual dragon, and the characters have a whimpering pansyfest argument about whether or not to fight it as it eats the characters. Alas, it's the 70s, and the monster is both cheesy and pricy, and so gets mercifully little screentime.

I used to read Howard the Duck comics as a kid. Of course, like everything, the movie was a disappointment. I have yet to see the bound-to-disappoint tintin, which I was fonder of as a kid. Still, howard is decent cheesy 80s fare. Which reminds me, did I mention in the B-movies thread, one I adore: Earth Girls are Easy.

I've actually seen all of these except Xanadu, Twilight and Galaxy of the Dinsosaurs.

Speaking of which: Among "Movies that don't live up to their titles," the troma team, in particular "nymphoid barbarian in dinosaur hell" and "teenage catgirls in heat." Even "cannibal amazons in the avacado jungle of death," which does much better, I don't think the amazons themselves are ever actually cannibals.

Twilight actually looks halfway decent, if mockable. it's got a cool theme. Speaking of mocking, have y'all seen the Taylor Swift NSL skit "Firelight" ? I was unable to get it but I got this nifty STOP SOPA effect
http://www.snotr.com/video/3316/SNL_Digital_Short_-_Firelight
It wasn't here either
http://vodpod.com/watch/2545043-firelight-with-taylor-swift-on-snl

Anyway, I can see that Galaxy of the Dinosaurs would be worse in a different way, but of the ones I've seen in these videos, I think the worst was Speed 2 by a healthy margin.

Oh, I also haven't seen Napoleon Dynamite. Looks worse. Has the look of a story of a kid who is picked on as written by the person picking on him.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

BYTEMITE

Thursday, January 19, 2012 2:21 AM

Quote:

Oh, I also haven't seen Napoleon Dynamite. Looks worse. Has the look of a story of a kid who is picked on as written by the person picking on him.

No, I wouldn't say that. The movie is pretty fair in distributing the amount of fail. Yeah, there's bullies, but they come off as mostly pathetic. Napoleon himself is merely a dork, and actually wins out over the bullies in the end. I guess it's more Kafka-lite than a straight Kafka comedy, it's got a surprisingly optimistic steak in it despite the setting and the themes.

RIONAEIRE

Thursday, January 19, 2012 4:00 AM

The thing about Napoleon Dynamite was that it made no sense. Dead end charactors in a dead end town and then he dances at the end. I think my dislike of it was heightened by the fact that it was so popular. If it hadn't been then I still would have thought it was lame, just not as lame.

So there were Howard the Duck comics? Bizarre. DT a chara, I bet you haven't seen Afghan Knights, if you do you will no doubt add it to your worst movie list. Of course my hatred of it was partly because of the summary sounding all good and Genghisful and then the movie sucked and they didn't time travel and I was pissed off.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

PHOENIXROSE

Thursday, January 19, 2012 6:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Well, I dunno, there's these whole tropes about Kafka Comedy and Stylistic Suck, and works made using one or both can be pretty entertaining.

Yeah, I frequent tvtropes, too. Stylistic Suck is a trope applied specifically to shows within a show, often for the purpose of making sure the main event doesn't look worse when compared to what its characters are watching. A good example (though I know you didn't personally watch Angel) would be the sitcom Cordelia was shown acting on during one arc of Angel, which featured ludicrous plots and poorly written dialogue. It was vaguely amusing in context, but not anything I would want to watch a full episode of. As shows within shows, Stylistic Suck is often done in very small doses, and so it rarely reaches the point of eye-gouging-ness, because it's just briefly played for laughs. If Napolean Dynamite had shown semi-interesting characters in a boring small town sitting around and watching the teeth-grinding dullness of the actual film and saying something like, "Wow, is that how we seem to people?" that could have been funny Stylistic Suck.
Kafka Komedy is about everything going terribly wrong, not everything being terribly dull. I don't tend to find Kafka Komedy all that funny, because I get tired of things going wrong and characters being villainized for no good reason, but it can least be dynamic and entertaining. This trope does not apply to Napolean Dynamite because things don't go horribly wrong due to the good intentions of the characters. In fact, there's not a whole lot of things going horribly wrong because not a lot happens in general.
You might be thinking of "So Bad, It's Good," but my impression of that is of things that are so hammily overacted they become hilarious, or special effects so fake-looking they're funny, or plots so ludicrous they're laughable. I rarely find such things entertaining, personally, but sometimes the over-the-top nature of someone's Ham And Cheese will amuse me. Also, "So Bad, It's Good" seems to be categorized as an entirely unintentional trope, much like Narm.

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.