Worst Movie(S) You've Seen

[Jonathan Crane]

Happy Feet.the Adventures of Tin Tin.a Christmas Carol. (The one with Jim Carrey.)Rio.Star Wars: Ewok Adventures.the Black Hole.

[Tarushan]

The Last Airbender.The opening mimics the cartoon series' opening, yet instead of using the actual Chinese characters the show puts into the background they are replaced by random squiggles. This is the first of many, many things the movie inexplicably does wrong.

Ditto. Couldn't agree more. I seriously loathe that movie with a passion.

^Do you have some weird need to hate me? I don't see what I've ever done to you.

Don't take it personally. I think I've disagreed with Dovydas before, but it's all good debate over the internet, so yeah.

Sharkboy and LavagirlStar Wars: V and VI, even though I LOVE Star WarsShark TaleHigh School Musical 1, 2, 3Shrek 2

Noooo you just listed some of my favorite movies....ah memories. Edited January 4, 2012 by JDJackson

[Jonathan Crane]

what ones did I list?

[Voltex]

Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief comes to mind immediately- only a few nights ago I BARELY managed to make sure I didn't have to sit through it a second time. It was so bad I ended up skipping half the movie. Ugh.Looking back, Eragon was pretty terrible too. Another book ruined by a movie.I think I'm fairly unique in this opinion, but I really didn't enjoy Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2. The entire final battle was, to me, ripped to shreds and then thrown into a blender. Anything that was similar/the same as the book didn't even have the proper characters. Harry seemed rather out of character, especially during the scenes relating to Ginny. And the final death of Voldemort was anticlimatic. I just hated everything about the movie, except for one or two bits here and there.-ibrow

[Vorahk1Panrahk2]

And the final death of Voldemort was anticlimatic. I just hated everything about the movie, except for one or two bits here and there.

This was actually my biggest gripe of the novel. As written, Voldemort was just defeated without a whole lot of build up. At least in this one we got a cool flight around a castle.I will, though, say that the movie needed more of a conclusion. There were a lot of questions remaining that deserved maybe another ten minutes to answer. Like how was Hogwarts rebuilt? How long did it take? Who became headmaster? Did Hermione's parents get their memories back? Did Harry ever get his wand repaired? Did they ever finish their education? Did parents sue Hogwarts for not taking ample measures to assure students' safety?

[pls respond]

SpliceThis was, very easily, the most disturbing movie I have seen in years. The effects are good, but it's just a very good-looking, slightly worse version of a SyFy original movie. "Raptor Island" jumps to mind, is how bad it is. But worse. If you've seen it, you know what I mean. At first, the movie was okay. But then it got really twisted. I won't go into detail, but between blood-spatters, cat-killing, and just plain old, mindless violence, you can get the picture. I strongly urge people not to watch it.0.001/5 stars

i feel like there's a difference between something being disturbing and being bad. now i've never seen splice but it seems like your main gripe is the disturbing content which i wouldn't really consider a reason to call something the worst film you've ever seen Edited January 6, 2012 by Idunnolol

[Voxumo]

the worst movie i have seen that i can remeber right now is probaly kung fu hustle it's so cheesy it is funny.

[Jonathan Crane]

same with adventure time. It's stupid to the point it's funny.

[Voxumo]

some one mentioned Eragon and i must agree i watched the movie first and at the time i thought it was good but then about 4 years later i read the book and realized how bad the movie was and how it totally went off course from the book. that was a horrible movie

[BBCCD]

being different from the book had nothing to do with Eragon being bad. need i remind you that two main characters died in the Jurassic Park book, but were both kept alive in the film, which is a huge deal. Yet that movie was still good. Eragon was bad because it was just, well, bad. I never read the book, I could care less hoe many differences there were from the book, it sucked as is.

[Toa Novu]

Vampires Suck was horrible.it felt like it was made to please Twilight fans. you don't make fun of something by appealing to the fans of the thing you're making fun of.

It's called self-parody and loving-parody. Doesn't make the movies and books any less awful, though.Anyway, I'm gonna have to say Batman and Robin. Just... just SO MANY THINGS WRONG WITH IT.

[Simulacrum]

Well, if anyone has seen it, you will understand.Attack of the Killer Shrews.

[Voxumo]

Well, if anyone has seen it, you will understand.Attack of the Killer Shrews.

let me guess syfythat actually-made me remember another horrible moviethe movie was called mosquito and it was a movie on syfy about these mosquitoes who sucked the blood of a alien that crash landed. the result was mosquitoes who grew larger than humans. and when they sucked the blood of a human the eyes of the human would pop out. That was probably the worst movie ever but what do you expect from syfy.

[dotcom]

same with adventure time. It's stupid to the point it's funny.

Something tells me you really don't understand your Adventure Time, if you think it's stupid [to the point of hilarity].It's like people completely miss the cleverly veiled social commentary and obscure references. A lot of humor is derived from ridiculous and admittedly dumb circumstances, but a great part of it is due to other things.On Topic: I guess I should mention the two Ben 10 movies, which make the cartoon look like a masterpiece.

[Wotz]

Sharkboy and Lavagirl. Batman and Robin. Shrek 3 & 4. Superman 3, 4 and Returns. Star Wars Episode I.That's all I can think of right now, haven't seen most of these choices other people are putting, I'm not much of a movie person.

[Jean Valjean]

Oh, please, I don't know what's with people jumping the gun and going from saying that the Star Wars prequels were not just a disappointment but the worst movies ever. My interpretation is that people wanted the films to have the exact same feel that the original series has (for some reason, I associate "the feel" with the cyan color of the end credits), but George Lucas probably figured that the prequel trilogy needed a different feel, since it had a different diverse cast of characters and was set in a different time and overall setting, one where the Republic was at its peak and a massive intergalactic civil war was breaking it down (Again, I also associate this new feel with a color, the gold of the opening crawl).So anyway, I suppose that people had their expectations, but I'm glad that it added to the diversity of the series and had a fun introduction of Anakin. Especially since it included Obi-Wan and Qui Gonn, both wonderfully done. I don't know what fan expectations were. The only real downer in the series was Episode II, in part due to Hayden's delivery of lines between Anakin and Padme, must mostly because I feel it was underdeveloped and this episode had the least character chemistry of all the series. It's still good, but it wouldn't fair well in a Star Wars hierarchy ranking.If there was any that truly was bad, it was Star Wars: The Clone Wars. It was obviously only a means of kicking off a series with a big name attached to it. I far preferred the animated series directed by the guy who did Samurai Jack. It was far less cartoony. Anakin having a wise-cracking padawon? I just hope that this show never becomes part of the permanent cannon.-By the way, I thought I'd through in my thoughts on the film adaptation of Jurassic Park. First, I just watched the trilogy for the first time in a very long time over Christmas break, and I have to say that it is one of the most awesome movies of all time, which biases me. Most people who watched the movie have not read the book, which actually works to Spielberg's advantage, because he can take more liberties in making the film its own thing.My interpretation of the differences is that there's a big difference between writing about dinosaurs and creating a movie about them. What Spielberg understood was that this was the first time that anyone was ever going to see dinosaurs in the theatres. He also understood the deep fascination that people have with the lizards, because they were big, mighty, and once kings of the earth, yet now they are unattainable. As he said in his own words, they had the allure of mythology. He knew that Jurassic Park was going to be a landmark film.So here's what he did: He made the film as cinematic as possible. What was very important was the human characters, so that they could reflect the same fascination the audience has. He made sure to make a grand moment of the Tyrannosaurus Rex entering the screen for the first time. Then, of course, he made sure the characters survived.See, here's the thing. He knew that as a movie, it was best fit to be awe inspiring, not thought provoking. Killing off the characters would have ended the film on a far less romantic note. The audience wanted a fantasy, not a tragedy. So even though Hammond could have been killed off (and I expected Ian Malcolm to end up in the stomach of a hungry dinosaur when I first watched the film), I think that Speilberg understood that the characters were just likeable enough that it would have hurt the power of the movie if they were killed.But anyway, the point that I was getting to was that movies, by combining many senses to make the experience "big", tend to inspire awe than books (and books tend to inspire more thought than movies), and also having professional actors play the parts of the characters can change the very way a person roots for them.If there's a second point (or perhaps a third, considering my last was actually two), it's that most films based on books really treat the books more as just an inspiration. The same thing happens when remakes are produced, such as the Total Recall remake I'm hearing about, which takes the original as a source, but from what I've heard will really be reimagined.I'm Tron Paul and I approve this post.

[reptiman]

Have any of you seen the sequel to dragon heart? It was HORRIBLE. Talk about cheesy. I watched it with my cousian and it was so cheesy I burst out laughing in the climax. It was horrible. The first one was a great movie though.

[Stryker055]

If there was any that truly was bad, it was Star Wars: The Clone Wars. It was obviously only a means of kicking off a series with a big name attached to it. I far preferred the animated series directed by the guy who did Samurai Jack. It was far less cartoony. Anakin having a wise-cracking padawan? I just hope that this show never becomes part of the permanent canon.

I feel obliged to point out that while the movie was pretty terrible, the series itself is a massive improvement (at least from Season 2 onward). It spotlights background characters, including Jedi, strange species, and (my favorite) individual clone troopers, and generally fleshes out the Star Wars universe and makes the Clone War seem like an actual war. And yes, there is a legitimate reason why Yoda gave Anakin a Padawan. Yes, it does make sense. (And yes, she does get much better.)Oh, and it's official canon like the Genndy Tartakovsky one (which is still probably better), since it's directly backed and kind of half-supervised by Lucas himself. So, uh, sorry.

[Ballom Nom Nom]

Every time this topic pops up, my answer is always Knowing. Promising concept, but oh dear god was the execution horrible. The pathetic second half was absolutely beneath contempt.~B~

[Mel]

GI Joe: Rise of Cobra wasn't even worth the $4 I payed because it was a matinee. The only good part of it was the hot ninja.

[Rumpelstiltskin]

I will, though, say that the movie needed more of a conclusion. There were a lot of questions remaining that deserved maybe another ten minutes to answer.

Actually, as none of those questions were answered in the books, they couldn't have been answered in the movie without making up answers to them (which, in most cases, I am vehemently against). One of them is a legitimate complaint, though -

Did Harry ever get his wand repaired?

That was worth taking the time to show. In the book, he repaired it with the Elder Wand before he got rid of the elder. That wand was as much a symbol of Harry as the invisiblity cloak; it was with him throughout the entire series, and to top it all off, it had Fawkes' tailfeather in it. To disregard the history of it, not to mention the sentiment, is a crime.--- --- ---And allow me to be the umpteenth person to cite Eragon as the worst novel adaptation ever! To completely abandon creature effects - did one CGI dragon cost so much money that you couldn't even try to create other creatures? I mean, there was no physical distinction between elves, men, and dwarves. Heck, I'd have been satisfied had they gone to Iparty and gotten pointed ears there. There was simply no effort put into it.Then there's the matter of Urgals - an interesting species, yet again, there was no physical distinctions between them and men. Was it too difficult to make ram horns? "They were deemed unnecessary." (paraphrasing, but I did read that somewhere.) How on Earth was that decision made?And the Ra'zac make another low blow to creative creatures. Human-shaped pterodactyl larvae are not mummified creatures conjured from a swarm of bugs. Just...no.Angela, though not necessarily a creature, was butchered, as well. How you can take a pleasant, grandmotherly figure and turn her into a blonde, nose-pierced fool is beyond me. Total injustice.And as if the visual effects were not horrid enough, they have to sever every single plot tie that connects Eragon to Eldest, thus completely destroying the story and any longing we might have had for a sequel.On one of the few positive notes I have, the casting of Robert Carlysle as Durza was spot on. He has to be one of my favorite oddball actors, and I am thoroughly in love with his portrayal of Rumpelstiltskin in Once Upon a Time.~Lord Rahl~ Edited January 12, 2012 by Lord Rahl

[BBCCD]

...there were actually elves and dwarfs in that movie? i didn't know.

[Mel]

I'm generally not a fan of the Inheritance series, but the movie definitely butchered everything and they obviously spent all their money on Saphira.

[Ezorov]

Well, if anyone has seen it, you will understand.Attack of the Killer Shrews.

(Yes, I know you posted this a while ago, but I couldn't help but comment )*Cries* Oh gosh, I totally saw that one. This was the one with the "shrews" barking and wagging their tails happily, right? Such a painful movie.Luckily I saw it with MST3K, so it was slightly more tolerable. But goodness, still terrible, mind you!Anyways, I would also have to say that Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightening Thief was a terrible movie! I could go on and on about how they completely ruined the books, but for the most part I'm just sad for the people who only watched the movie, thought it was actually good and were simply sastisfied with it. They're missing out on so much by not reading the books, and they don't even know! *Sigh*

[Simulacrum]

Actually, Attack of the Killer Shrews was a attempted serious 1950's horror film. Attack of the Gila Monster is a close second, thanks to that terrible scene with the guitar... Thank goodness the Gila Monster destroyed that place. XD

[Ezorov]

What a sad, sad attempt! :PHmm, I don't think I've actually seen that one yet. Haha, I'm kind of scared to now xD

[vulpelibrorum]

On the subject of bad horror films, there is, of course...The Mangler.It's about an industrial laundry presser...That eats people.What could possibly go wrong with such an inspired idea like that?

[vataki]

The first three Spy Kids movies (I never saw the 4th), Sharkboy and Lavagirl... Cars 2 was pretty bad, but only really if you compare it to the first one, or any other of the previous Pixar films. On it's own, it's not bad... just rather average.

[pls respond]

from what i can recall the first spy kids was actually a pretty decent film. it has a 93% on rottentomatoes as well

[vataki]

from what i can recall the first spy kids was actually a pretty decent film. it has a 93% on rottentomatoes as well

Perhaps, it's just that that type of movie doesn't exactly appeal to me.Oh, and I forgot about Shrek 3 (haven't seen 4 yet). It was really disappointing compared to the first two. (Especially the second one).

[Based Goomy]

Has anyone here ever heard of The Room with Tommy Wiseau? It was SOOO bad, that it was hilarious!Oh, and Batman & Robin can't go without being mentioned. I mean, how many ice puns can you possibly cram into a script?

Edited January 14, 2012 by Mylo Xyloto

[Mr. Fluffy]

Mortal Kombat was so bad that my brother and I stayed up til 3:30 in the morning making fun of it.

[Rumpelstiltskin]

...there were actually elves and dwarfs in that movie? i didn't know.

One of the main characters, Arya, is an Elf, and the final battle of the film took place in the Dwarvish capital. As you just pointed out, neither of which were readily apparent. ~Lord Rahl~ Edited January 15, 2012 by Lord Rahl

[King_Serperior]

I'm not going to say much here, because I don't usually see movies I don't think I'm going to like, but I'd like to take the time to say that The Last Airbender was the worst movie I have ever seen. I didn't quite realize this when I first saw it, given I was in a fair bit of denial and hoping it would be good. I hadn't heard of M. Night Shyamalan before, so I didn't quite know what all the kerfuffle was over this guy. But then I took the time to rewatch it when it got put up on Netflix. My god. Those two viewings are three hours of my life that I am never going to get back. Terrible casting, acting, writing, plot condensation, and attempts at drama. Almost all of the slow motion in the fight scenes seemed to be randomly inserted just so the scene could be stretched out without filming more. The actors sounded like they were in some slapped-together seventh-grade play. Shyamalan outright removed 'Koizilla' from the climax (which was the one part of the movie I wanted to see most), and the bending was changed to fifteen seconds of random buildup moves, followed by the actual effect, which would have taken one arm-thrust to do in the show. They even changed the actual Chinese script from the show into a bunch of lame "Asian-inspired" scribbles. I'm just glad the original team is making another animated series, so this horrendous piece of crud won't be the series' last word in the public mind.But the effects were decent.

I agree. What was one of the major parts of the whole Avatar franchise (In my opinion) were the Asian influences, such as the sharp curves of Fire Nation architecture, clothing and robes shared by people from all four nations, even to the Earth King's bear's hat and shirt. Don't get me wrong or anything, but they could easily do better than the actors they cast. If I remember correctly, Dev Patel didn't even have the scar the real Zuko had, and Azula (who was that one girl we all loved to hate in the series) was instead his father's personal suck-up. Also, if some die-hard fans like me remember, each element had certain motions affiliated with them, like how Earth had fists and Fire, had sharp, two fingered jabs."Koizilla" was also one of my favorite parts of the original series. I don't think Noah Wringer (the actor who played Aang, or Ong in the movie's case) ever got another job in Hollywood again.

[Mel]

In recent memory, I can think of two very bad films I've watched. I expected both of them to be good, so it's not as if I knew better:Blade Runner: Depressing film is depressing. You know, there are certain films which, as Zippy said, are so bad that they're good, like Battlefield Earth, but this was a film that was so bad that it was bad. I can see where the director was going with it, but I feel that he missed the mark. Although apparently it has a different effect for other people, because there are people who absolutely love this film. I can't speak for them, because obviously I lack that understanding.

I loved Blade Runner. What about it struck you as bad? I remember thinking they don't make movies like this anymore. The world building and filming were so lovelying done and so gritty and believable. It lacked the candy coated CGI and need for ACTION that permiates most sci-fi and fantasy today. Not to mention that it was made thirty years ago. The only part that ticked me off was the Hollywood ending tacked on, which aparently wasn't in the directors intention but was forced on because they worried that otherwise it wouldn't sell. (Neither were the voice overs.)I dislike Twilight because of the dangerous precedent it sets and because it is bad writing. (I don't mind the movies so much, but that is probably because the actor who plays Edward has the same attitude toward Twilight as I do. ) Christopher Paolini is just as bad of a writer, imo, but because he caters to dangerous male fantasies instead of dangerous female ones I have a feeling that he is going to get more approval here.

[Ernst Stavro Blofeld]

Bionicle: Mask of Light. http://www.bzpower.com/board/public/style_emoticons/default/tounge2.gifJoking. JOKING!In all seriousness, Adam Sandler's Billy Madison was the worst movie I ever saw. I usually have a high tolerance for movies-heck, I thought Eragon was good when I first saw it-but even Billy Madison was, to put it midly, underwhelming for me. If there's an intellectual subtext I didn't realize, I'd genuinely like to hear about it so I can see it in a lighte note, but at least for now it was...well, let's just say it was a Monty Python movie made for an audience comprised of Monty Python characters by directors who didn't quite get Monty Python in the first place.Oh, and a bit off topic, but hearing about Diesel 10 from Thomas and the Magic Railroad brought back repressed memories.

[BenLuke]

the Adventures of Tin Tin.

What? That movie was great...

[-Whiplash-]

Star Wars: V and VI, even though I LOVE Star Wars

WHATYou just listed one of the greatest sequels of all time as one of the worst movies you've ever seen. Please explain yourself.

I just didn't like either of them. for the most part, in V, when Han Solo cutsn open the Tauntaun's stomach, and puts Luke in it, that was just gross.

They were going to die. In real life if you were in a similier situation you'd be thanking han solo right then.Anyway:Rubber. ###### that movie was awful, I know it was about the audiance but it wasen't funny, did not make me think, and obviously was made for no reason other than some guy went "you know what would be cool.."Batman and Robin. Ugh.Daredevil. UghWolverine origins. They ruined deadpool. the only good part of this movie the first 20 minutes with the REAL deadpool in it.X-men 3. This movie was unbelivably terrible. Like they took every/onething I liked about X-men and killed them. Except Magneto. The best part of this movie was when it ended.Spider-man 3. It didn't live up to the hype at all in fact, I was so pumped for that movie that it felt like the biggest dissapointment ever. Still does, Green Lantern was similier but just the ending made it dissapointing. Spider-man 3 the entire thing was just dissapointing. I blame whoever dicided to shove in venom at the last minute. they could've saved him for spider-man 4.Dragonball Evoloution. OMG this is just completly awful.Mortal Kombat annihalation. The first one was good cause it was like MK. This one was like MK3, if nothing about it was even remotely good.King of fighters. Another terrible movie. At least the live action first SF movie was so bad it was good. This was just so bad it was bad.Street fighter the legend of chun-li. They took everything about SF and threw it out the window. At least the first SF movie everyone looked like there characters, in this one no one did and no one acted like there characters either.Street fighter Alpha: the animation. AGGHHH this was terrible. like ryu has brother? WTH? then he's a monster and bison's some sort of scientist, only one thing to describe this movie: WHAT THE ######?Terimantor 3. the whole world dies. what a nice ending.Ang lee hulk. It's like, he knew some thing about hulk but chose to make his own stupid abrigged version of it.Moonraker. Worst bond film ever. I should know. I've watched all of them. Bond + space = ######.No wonder I'm not a movie person. Half the movies I watched sucked ######. Edited January 28, 2012 by Shuma-Gorath

[Ernst Stavro Blofeld]

Star Wars: V and VI, even though I LOVE Star Wars

WHATYou just listed one of the greatest sequels of all time as one of the worst movies you've ever seen. Please explain yourself.

I just didn't like either of them. for the most part, in V, when Han Solo cutsn open the Tauntaun's stomach, and puts Luke in it, that was just gross.

They were going to die. In real life if you were in a similier situation you'd be thanking han solo right then.Anyway:Rubber. ###### that movie was awful, I know it was about the audiance but it wasen't funny, did not make me think, and obviously was made for no reason other than some guy went "you know what would be cool.."Batman and Robin. Ugh.Daredevil. UghWolverine origins. They ruined deadpool. the only good part of this movie the first 20 minutes with the REAL deadpool in it.X-men 3. This movie was unbelivably terrible. Like they took every/onething I liked about X-men and killed them. Except Magneto. The best part of this movie was when it ended.Spider-man 3. It didn't live up to the hype at all in fact, I was so pumped for that movie that it felt like the biggest dissapointment ever. Still does, Green Lantern was similier but just the ending made it dissapointing. Spider-man 3 the entire thing was just dissapointing. I blame whoever dicided to shove in venom at the last minute. they could've saved him for spider-man 4.Dragonball Evoloution. OMG this is just completly awful.Mortal Kombat annihalation. The first one was good cause it was like MK. This one was like MK3, if nothing about it was even remotely good.King of fighters. Another terrible movie. At least the live action first SF movie was so bad it was good. This was just so bad it was bad.Street fighter the legend of chun-li. They took everything about SF and threw it out the window. At least the first SF movie everyone looked like there characters, in this one no one did and no one acted like there characters either.Street fighter Alpha: the animation. AGGHHH this was terrible. like ryu has brother? WTH? then he's a monster and bison's some sort of scientist, only one thing to describe this movie: WHAT THE ######?Terimantor 3. the whole world dies. what a nice ending.Ang lee hulk. It's like, he knew some thing about hulk but chose to make his own stupid abrigged version of it.Moonraker. Worst bond film ever. I should know. I've watched all of them. Bond + space = ######.No wonder I'm not a movie person. Half the movies I watched sucked ######.

I'm going to have to disagree with you on your choice of the worst Bond film. The worst was in fact Never Say Never Again. Although, I suppose that that can be explained by the fact that it wasn't made by Eon, unlike most of the others...

the Adventures of Tin Tin.

What? That movie was great...

I agree!

[-Whiplash-]

I'm going to have to disagree with you on your choice of the worst Bond film. The worst was in fact Never Say Never Again. Although, I suppose that that can be explained by the fact that it wasn't made by Eon, unlike most of the others...

Well, to be fair, I never watched it cause it was just thunderball and as you said it's not made by eon so I didn't watch it.So I guess I haven't watched all the bond films.