Worst Movies of All Time (Started by Joel)

Can anyone name a movie or movies that they thought were the worst of all time? If you discount all those low budget “b” type films and just stick to major hollywood releases can anybody name a few that left such a terrible taste in their mouth and why? how about worst actors/actresses as well?

As for Joel’s list of movies he absolutely hates, he can add two right now…

Random Hearts and Event Horizon

Random Hearts was a movie of constant selfdeprecating lothing and wining. I couldn’t stand the ever growing spiral of sadness. You just wish their respective characters *harrison ford’s character and Kristen Scott Thomas’s character* would be a little more “proactive” eventually and do something about their collective misery. BUT THEY NEVER DID!!!! AGHHHH!! This movie was pure torture for me and would be my own personal “clockwork orange” torture movie/music at the end being forced to see it.

As for “event horizon” I completely hated the logic–or lack there of–in the film. The plot and characters seemed interesting enough but as the story develops, you’re simply left with to many vague concepts and character motivations that led you down a winding “goosechase” to nowhere.

Granted I think sci-fi films have so many bad films and I’m sure there are a ton more, but “event horizon” get special notice for me.

As for bad actors. I don’t care for Keanu Reeves *big surprise* simply because everyone…I mean everyone thinks he’s still “Ted” from bill and ted’s excellent adventure. You still hear the word “dude” echo from his lips after every line he says after every character he plays.

Matthew McConaughey is another one I really don’t care for. He just seems a little to stiff/vanila/plain to be playing the characters he’s been playing. Maybe it’s just a vibe I get, but when I look at his acting I just don’t “get it” sometimes.

38 Responses to “Worst Movies of All Time (Started by Joel)”


  1. Reid

    Oh, you are in good company with regard to your remarks about Event Horizon. However, I agree Keanu has a hard time escaping from his “dude” persona, but he is strangely charismatic or appealing.

    As for worst movie, the movie that comes to mind first is Black Robe. It was incredibly pretentious movie and experience(even the guy sitting next to me and Chris ate his licorice in a prententious way). I guess I didn’t care for the protagonist in the film–a Catholic priest sent to preach to Native Americans. Maybe I would think differently of it now, but that’s how I felt when I first saw it.

    It’s really hard to pin down the “worst film” given your criteria. I’m not even sure what would be in the top ten, especially given your criteria. I guess, if a film reaches a certain level of poor quality, it doesn’t matter how much worse it gets.

  2. Chris Magnusson

    Oh—-

    I haven’t thought of *Black Robe* for a while. Ouch that was bad.

    My least favorite have to be *Boxing Helena* for the pretentiousness factor and *Battlefield Earth* for the just plain bad factor. And, oh my dear *Tomb Raider*. I used to have to go to movies w/ homeless kids at my old job for special occasions, so I got to see some bad bad movies. *She’s all That* was memorable as far as that goes.

    Chris

  3. burgess

    Two really big Hollywood releases that were disappointingóThe Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. In both movies, the biggest problem was the Anakin Skywalker character. Also, in the Phantom Menace, the children werenít cute, just annoyingóthe timing, the vocal inflection, expressions, were so bad, it was like watching a mediocre elementary school production. Still, if the final chapter ever comes out, I know Iím going to see it.

    These movies, though probably not among the worst of all time, because they were such major releases, should be given some consideration.

  4. Reid

    Chris,

    Why is Tomb Raider so bad for you? I mean, I thought it was bad, but not so much worse than so many other films of that genre. How is it worse than, say, Mimic (sorry, Don) or Con Air, just to name two that came to the top of my head. I just saw Van Helsing recently, and I thought that was equivalent to Tomb Raider, too. Bad, but not extraordinarily so.

    John,

    Actually, Attack of the Clones might be a candidate for one of the worst films of all time. I think casting Christian Hayden was one of the biggest flaws. There was just no chemistry between the characters, and that’s something all the other Star Wars films had (including Phantom), imo.

    I didn’t mind little Ani, and I loved Liam Neeson as Qui Gong Jin. I was disappointed when they killed him off.

    I also just didn’t think the pacing and the way Lucas built up to action sequences in Clones was very effective. That’s not true with Phantom, imo. The big problem with Phantom was Jar-Jar Binks and the gundins. Take those characters our or at least Jar-jar, and it’s a way better film.

    I also think they did a terrible job of building Darth Maul’s character. They didn’t build him up at all. He had the potential to be a great villian: he looked cool, and he had that cool weapon. They needed to establish his character, and maybe if there were some backstory with Qui Gong, that would have added to the rama of the climatic fight scene. That’s just sloppy filmmaking. And it got sloppier in Clones.

    The other thing about Clones is that Samuel Jackson is a teally terrible jedi.

  5. joel

    Attack of the clones is one of the worst films of all time? Granted people will “vibe” or react differently when discussing “acting” techniques or character choices *jar jar*, but for what it’s worth, the entire Star Wars series is a visual work of art. The action sequences though pradictable are still very good. The sound effects and character designs are top notch. Maybe I’m just a little partial to Star Wars for it’s nastalgic influences, but I could watch this film a million times over before seeing say…”stop or my mom will shoot?” Or what about “night at the roxberry.” An entire film based on the head bobbing clubbing phonies?

    You know I heard they almost made a film on “toonces: the driving cat” man that would’ve been bad.

    “Battle field Earth” was a bad film indeed. Ugh. I can’t even remember what possessed me to watch it.

    Boy that Scifi genre has a whole lot of bad films huh. I guess that’s why mystery science theater lasted for so long.

  6. Reid

    Re: Attack of the Clones

    I enjoyed most of the Star Wars films, but Attack was pretty terrible because of the two things I mentioned. The other Star Wars films had bad acting and annoying characters, but the characters were likeable and they had chemistry. The action sequences and special effects are top notch, AND those scenes were often set up very well. I’m talking about the way the filmmaker would use the scenes before the action sequences to set them up. These two things–plus the general story–made the SW films so entertaining for me.

    Attack lacks those two key ingredients. Special effects and action by itself is nothing without a solid story and a skillful way of telling that story. I get annoyed by films and filmmakers that think that they can make a good film by just throwing a bunch of special effects at the audience with little regard to storytelling. I think Attack of the Clones is a good candidate for worst film partly because it should have and could have been so much better.

  7. burgess

    The best part of “Attack of the Clones” is when Yoda kicks some serious ass, but even that can’t save this film.

    Some other movies to consider: “What’s Love got to do with it”, “Backbeat”, and surprise, “Ellen Brockovich”. One thing that these movies have in common is that they’re better suited as “made for tv” movies, not that they would have been better on the small screen.

  8. Reid

    I enjoyed Erin Brockovich, but even if I didn’t, worst film? I don’t get that.

  9. burgess

    You’re right, worst film is probably a bit much. I guess the problem I have is that I don’t see a lot of bad movies anymore.

    Another pick that might spark some controversy is “Forrest Gump”. I was bored by it–though I’m willing to listen to why many people thought it was great. Tom Hanks was great, but I just didn’t get it.

  10. Reid

    Once again. I can understand if you didn’t enjoy it, but worst film? I know people who hated that film because they thought it supported a dumbing down of society.

    It’s been a while since I’ve seen the film, so I don’t know if I could articulate why I liked it. Gump was a likeable character in the “Holy Fool” mode and that appealed to me. I liked the way Zemekis blended the archived footage and historical events into the story. At the time I thought it fit well and avoided being merely a gimmick.

  11. joel

    Reid,

    as for your comments about keanu reeves being charismatic…I feel his only redeeming roll is in “the matrix.” He plays Neo very well. The innocent, “wide eyed,” adventurer, searching for the truth about life and himself, but remember even in that film he looked a little “stupid.” After Morpheous shows Neo how to jump from building to building…and neo’s one word responce. “whoa.” Tell me you didn’t see TED in that voice.

    Maybe he will just never break that persona what ever roll he plays. (shoulder shrug).

  12. Reid

    Joel,

    He didn’t escape the persona in The Matrix, but there is still something appealing about him as the action lead. I think he also “redeemed” himself in Speed.

  13. burgess

    Reid,

    The problem I had with “Forest Gump” is not the “dumbing down of society,” it was boring, predictable, I felt like I was watching a “look what I can do with technology” kind of movie. I’ve overstated things, again, when I said it was one of the worst movies ever. It isn’t, but, for a major Hollywood release, I thought it was pretty bad. Perhaps I’m putting too much emphasis on the “major Hollywood release” portion of the thread. I just don’t get Gump. I thought that every other film nomiated for best picture Oscar, was better than “Gump”–Shawshank, Quizshow, and Bullets Over Broadway.

  14. Reid

    I really liked Shawshank and Quiz Show (didn’t care much for Bullets), but I also liked Gump.

    I don’t think I can say much more if you didn’t care for Gump as a character or if you thought the film was too gimmicky.

    I think the film where Hanks is alone on a desert island is a better candidate for worst film.

    Oh, I just remembered another: On Guard. The film was OK until the last twenty minutes, and especially the ending. I was really, really annoyed, almost ed off that anybody could make a film like this and think audiences would accept this. It was a French film, but I have a hard time accepting the fact that mainstream French fans would find the resolution tolerable.

    *****Spoiler Alert*******

    This is for those of you who are curious to know what made upset me about this film. Without going into details, a swordsman raises from an infant–basically becoming her father, for all intents and purposes– and when she becomes a young woman (beautiful I might add), she begins to fall in love with him. He resists at first–not because he’s her FATHER, but because he is poor! He gets over that and the movie ends with them embracing and kissing. (The film is one of those swashbuckling films, but I skipped over those parts because they were OK.)

  15. Mitchell

    Event Horizon is the worst film I’ve ever seen, but Grace, Reid, and Penny already know that. What makes it suck above all other movies that suck is that it puts you through something really, really unpleasant and for no redeeming reason. The characters do not redeem themselves. The plot doesn’t redeem itself. The actors don’t even redeem themselves.

    When it was all over, I felt violated. I am not one to throw the word “rape” around metaphorically, but this is about as close as I’ve been to having something violently, unsuspectingly taken from me, leaving me–honest to God–humiliated and ashamed.

    No other movie has done anything like that. At least The Blair Witch Project, a movie that made me physically ill, only made me PHYSICALLY ill.

    Event Horizon is the first movie I’ve ever seen that is morally reprehensible. Not just its message or story–its very existence.

  16. joel

    Wow, looks like “event horizon” is winning by a landslide. I see I’m not the only one who got caught in that “deathtrap” of a movie.

    “Blair witch project” was a bad film, but if we’re going by my brother’s criteria of a good/bad film at least the intent and concept was appealing.

    I’m curious to see what other people think of the major film critics choices of really bad films? Did anyone see “Ishtar?” I heard that really sucked.

  17. Reid

    I never saw Ishtar, so I can’t comment. I didn’t think Waterworld was as bad as everyone said it was (although the movie cost a lot to make).

    I know that Stealing Home made Ebert’s list of worst films, but I enjoyed that movie.

  18. pen

    Definitely Event Horizon. Ugh. Double ugh. That is the one movie that clearly stands in the “Worst Movie Ever” category for me. It was one of those movies that you chastise yourself after you’ve watched it knowing you can never get those 2 hours of your life back again. I watched the entire thing because I kept telling myself, “it has to get better, right?” Well, it didn’t.

  19. Jenn

    I think I’d have to go with The Avengers on this one. As much as I love Sean Connery, and Ralph Fiennes looked sooo slick in that suit (was it with a bowler?), they could not save this film. It was just a big disappointment.

  20. Chris Magnusson

    Yes, yes yes: *Event Horizon* is in for me too! And it is lovely to be a part of a near-consensus for a change. I saw it by myself, and in a theater, to add to the violation experience. Real money and nobody to comiserate with.

    But, has anyone seen *Boxing Helena*?

  21. Reid

    I think I’m going to have to see Event Horizon.

    Chris,

    I haven’t seen Boxing Helena, but I heard about it. I think Kim Bassinger was slated to play “Helena”, but she got out of it. That’s all I really know about the film, except the bizarre premise (something about her arms being removed or something like that).

    Have you seen the movie adaptation of Joshua, a book about Christ that I really liked? They chose the villian from Ghost to play Jesus. That was a bad move right there, among other things.

  22. joel

    Doesn’t it feel good when you totally connect with people on something you might think others would consider “okay” or “better than?” Chalk another “victim” to “event horizon.” But really if you really want to compare the “stinkers” I still say “random hearts” was worse.

  23. Chris

    Boxing Helena was directed by David Lynch’s daughter. I’m sure that’s the only reason it was made. It is just ridiculous.

    Another movie I just had a strong negative reaction to (and this is one the Reid really *liked*) is *Breaking the Wind* . . . or is it called *Breaking the Waves* (I can never remember). I walked out of the theater right after the scene on the bus. Not out of some kind of revulsion (goodness knows, I’ve seen *Happiness* multiple times and loved it) but I just really couldn’t get into the heightened melodrama of it all.

  24. Chris

    There is no excuse for double posting.

  25. Reid

    Deja vu all over again.

    Chris,

    You gotta give Breaking the Waves another shot, if for no other reason than to see Emily Watson. I don’t remember the bus scene, though. How far along in the movie was that? What was the context? (Did you read my review I wrote, here at V-I?)

  26. Chris Magnusson

    Reid — think handj*b, public transport, ya gotta remember . . . maybe it was such a commonplace for you that it didn’t really register?????

    I agree, Emily Watson is INCREDIBLE, but I found the tone to be pretentious beyond. However, I was with someone I was keen on impressing when I saw it; I was young, insecure — not at all 35 and insecure like I am now . . .

    Emily forever,

    Chris

  27. Reid

    Chris,

    I remember which scene you’re talking about. I think it was in the first half of the film, so you missed a lot of the film. But I think it is worth watching until the end. It can be hard to take, and the film is not immune to criticism, but it’s an interesting film with really strong performances. Von Trier wrestles with the a similar dilemma faced by Abraham when God asked him to sacrifice Isaac.

  28. Chris Magnusson

    What about the idea that a movie can be really really bad based on the difference between budget and/or expections and quality? A tawdry B movie won’t make the list this way, but, say, the new Oliver Stone film *Alexander* is SURE to make it, if the trailer is any indication. Oh dear. Someone please watch the slomo Colin Farrel (who looks like GW Bush, eyes all close together and full of death) charging around to create a temporary, ill-advised empire.

    But I digress. Really this is all about the legitimacy of claiming that the Star Wars episodes 1 and 2 movies have a legitimate claim at being very very very bad, if not actually the worst movies ever made. On a visceral level, my oh my are they bad.

    c

  29. burgess

    Queen of the Damned

    This was an awful movie. Queen was no Interview with the Vampire. There is no Lestat outside of Tom Cruise–he owned the part in Interview.

    Queen of the Damned was just inferior to Interview with the Vampire, probably because Anne Rice didn’t write the screenplay for Queen of the Damned, and maybe if I didn’t like the book so much, I would’t think the movie was all that bad.

  30. Reid

    We could probably fill a separate thread on the failed movie adaptations of novels. Actually, one of the best was Silence of the Lambs. I don’t think anything was lost in the book and Anthony Hopkins performance of Hannibal Lecter, might have made the movie better than the novel.

    Chris,

    I think the let down factor is huge in a thread like this for the reasons you stated.

  31. Reid

    I was flipping through the tv channels, and I saw bits of the remake Planet of the Apes. That might qualify as one of the worst movies ever.

  32. joel

    Planet of the Apes remake as one of the worst movies ever? Explain? I thought the film was entertaining enough to keep my attention. The action sequences were enough for me NOT the warrent the “one of the worst movies ever” title. I didnt’ think the acting was all that bad either???

  33. Reid

    I can’t remember specifically why I thought the movie was so bad to me.

  34. joel

    I think the scifi channel is showing “event horizon” sometime this weekend. To my fellow “idiots” who haven’t had the displeasure of seeing it…now here’s your chance.

  35. kevin

    I recently suffered through Todd Solonz’s “Happiness.” Not that there weren’t some extremely powerful moments; but ultimately it felt like film-director-therapy movie, & a litany of sexual hangups.

    I didn’t think Planet…Apes was that bad, tho., considering it as a product of the context of the 1960’s (civil rights, Silent Spring, space exploration.) I love the Broadway parody of it on the Simpsons, also.

  36. Reid

    Kevin,

    I meant Tim Burton’s remake of Planet of the Apes. I think the original was one of the better sci-fi movies.

  37. Chris

    That’s too bad, I actually enjoyed *Happiness*, which makes me, well, I don’t know . . .

    I guess I liked the flatness of the ‘criminal’ part of the movie–I had never seen that portrayed before, and it was done in an unsentimental way.

    Chris

  38. kevin

    Chris: Nah, I don’t feel everyone needs to find it a personal worst, and I did enjoy Phil.Sey.Hoffman. For me personally, though, I felt like I had worked with the movie, and suffered through it, and got to the end and found more despair. This isn’t in itself bad (I now like Neil LaBute tho my initial experience w/ In the Company of Men was similar), but it’s probably not a process I’d pile on extra helpings of right now.

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.