I’ll second many mentioned here- Nothing But Trouble, Hudson Hawk, Ishtar, John Carter, Stuart Saves His Family, most of Ed Wood’s work.
Really, I will have fun deriding Tim Burton’s Planet of the Apes with friends, but if it had been titled Simian World, I’d have enjoyed it a lot more.
And if the glorious original Wicker Man had never existed & the Nicholas Cage version was the only one, it wasn’t horrible.
But I’ll add the series responsible for the nightmares of a whole decade (1970s) Christian-raised kids… A Thief in the Night & its three sequels. Cheesy, low-budget Rapture-Tribulation films that deliver a real gut punch (the second one- A Distant Thunder - is the best).
One that comes to mind for me is Not Another Teen Movie, which has a 28% on RT. I happened to catch it on TV and it was amusing. I think possibly some gross-out scenes were edited out Ebert complains of “characters being sprayed with vast quantities of excrement.”
Speaking of Ebert, I thought I’d have a look through the index to his book Your Movie Sucks and see which of his zero stars I’d give at least 2 and a half. I came up with Wolf Creek, Team America: World Police, and Constantine. I wasn’t sure about some because he may mean a remake, for instance The Grudge, so I left them off. Ebert’s review of Constantine is one of my favorite bad reviews, incidentally.
The Angry Video Game Nerd has a video about sequels that don’t suck as much as fans claim. He pointed out that Crystal Skull wasn’t as terrible as the fanboys claimed, comparing the infamous refrigerator scene to the time they jump out of a plane and use a rubber raft for a parachute. South Park also satirized the perceived rape of Mr Jones. Yeah, that’s true, but it was still a pretty crap movie IMO.
Turns out, it’s almost impossible to find North on DVD, as it never got officially released on it in America, and other countries where it did are out of stock.
I agree, though I’m not sure most viewers or critics thought it was terrible, just a vocal minority of the original trilogy’s fans. It’s in the same category as the Phantom Menace.
An actually reviled film which I personally thought wasn’t bad(note: still not good) was Uwe Boll’s Postal. I laughed many times.
I saw Patch Adams in the theatre with 3 family members and we all really liked it. Looking back it was very manipulative and somewhat maudlin, but it was enjoyable and funny.
13th Warrior got slammed pretty hard by the critics and I’m not sure why. I liked the book when I read it and I thought the movie was pretty decent as well. It wasn’t perfect by any means, but I thought it did a decent job with the whole story.
I’ll agree with this. I liked it. For some reason there were several versions of Beowulf coming out about that time, while there had hardly been anything before. These ranged from awful (the Christopher Lambert techno-Beowulf) to mediocre (Syfy’s Grendel) to prettyy darned good (Zemeckis’ motion-capture Beowulf with its Neil Gaiman script, the Iceland-filmed Beowulf and Grendel with Gerard Butler, and the Michael Crichton film). Except for Zemeckis’ version (which got a fair amount of nasty reviews), none of these got much attention or appreciation, but they were mostly much better than critics seemed to think (IMHO)
I can fall asleep from boredom watching Batman (89), but I think Batman and Robin is pretty entertaining. It’s not good, and it’s pretty cheesy, but it’s a lot more fun than Tim Burton’s first movie.
I laughed quite a bit at Land of the Lost. My kids, however loved it. At a certain point in the movie, my son actually paused it, looked at me and said, “This is the greatest movie ever made.”
A Night at the Roxbury. 11% at Rotten Tomatoes, with particularly harsh reviews from Ebert and James Berardinelli, both of whom I like a lot.
It’s not a good movie. But, to echo the common refrain in this thread, I’ve seen worse. It did have its funny moments- there was a good send-up of the “You-had-me-at-hello” scene from Jerry McGuire, after the brothers made up after an argument. When the brothers weren’t speaking to each other, we got to see Chris Kattan, seemingly on the verge of tears, staring forlornly out a window into a rainy night as sad music played, comforting himself by snacking on Readi-Whip sprayed straight into his mouth from the can. It was stupid but funny.
Also, it featured a completely unexpected- and thus completely hilarious- ass-over-head pratfall by the Chris Kattan character.
You should watch the Mr. Plinkett review of Indy 4. Even with his analysis tearing it apart, you can tell that he mostly likes the movie. Indy 4 is definitely nowhere near as bad as the Star Wars prequels.
“1408” (or was it “Room 1408”?) A Stephen King-ish writer who investigates haunted houses is locked in a hotel room, #1408, as a matter of fact. Stars John Cusak and it isn’t entirely awful. (Though he must be one HELL of a writer, he’s wildly popular with his fans. Something like his job seems more made-for-cable-tv).
I don’t get why people say it’s a bad movie. Depp is funny & charming and Jolie looks every inch the A-list movie star. I defy anyone to watch the opening sequence of Jolie and not say to himself or herself, “Now that’s what a movie star is supposed to look like.”
I think the Cage version was SO bad that it circled around and became good, as a hysterically funny, if unintentionally so, parody of… something. I swear I almost fainted with laughter a couple of times.
