# Movies You Didn't Expect to Suck So Bad **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [March 10, 2011, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196 "2011-03-10T17:27:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2011, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/161 "2011-03-15T15:05:46Z")
> [@Nobody](#): > > I liked it just because of how weird and quirky it was. How can anyone dislike a movie where old ladies fish for a frog dinner - with grenades? šŸ˜ƒ ---
**Author:** ![Eutychus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Eutychus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eutychus)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2011, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/162 "2011-03-15T16:17:56Z")
**TheCat in the Hat** ā€¦ how Ron Howard could completely suck the charm out of a Dr. Suess book is beyond me! ---
**Author:** ![cmkeller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmkeller/32/118_2.png) [@cmkeller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmkeller)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2011, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/163 "2011-03-15T16:40:57Z")
Eutyschus: > [@](#): > > TheCat in the Hat ā€¦ how Ron Howard could completely suck the charm out of a Dr. Suess book is beyond me! Really? The very idea that this book - or any book thatā€™s meat to amuse pre-schoolers for ten minutes - could be stretched into a feature-length film and still be decent entertainment is absurd. How could a live-action film capture the quality of enjoyment that comes from the cadence of reading Seussā€™s poetry? ---
**Author:** ![Swallowed\_My\_Cellphone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@Swallowed\_My\_Cellphone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Swallowed_My_Cellphone)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2011, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/164 "2011-03-15T16:51:50Z")
> [@davey77](#): > > The Avengers. No, not the one with Captain America, the one where Ralph Fiennes and Uma Thurman play Steed and Peel as automatons Years ago I had read that _The Avengers_ was awful. The review specifically said that the (lack of) chemistry between Uma and Ralph was the worst ever recorded on film. Personally, I think Fiennes retired a long time ago and sends an android to earn his paycheck even at the best of times (except when heā€™s all lizard-like in Harry Potter - as a lizard man, the guy actually has some charisma). But Uma Thurman can usually manage to has _some_ kind of appeal and can play off her co-stars to generate some kind of snappy-zingitude. So expecting the movie to be crap, I watched it on TV while babysitting my goddaughter. ā€œLack of chemistryā€ was an understatement. ā€œCrapā€ was an understatement. Every second the two of them were onscreen, ā€œchemistryā€ was sucked out of the atmosphere. I ushered my goddaughter into another room to shield her from the chemistry suckage lest the two talking mannequins generated a chemistry-suckwave so strong that sheā€™d grow up to have the charm of a piece of soggy cardboard. How can two people who are supposed to be A-list hotties, combine to have the sex appeal of cold, mildewed pasta? ---
**Author:** ![Chopper9760](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cdc98d/32.png) [@Chopper9760](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chopper9760)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2011, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/165 "2011-03-15T19:08:48Z")
It makes me feel like a curmudgeonly asshole but I donā€™t like any of the computer animated kidsā€™ movies. Toy Story, Shrek, UP, WALL-E, and the like. Someone recently started a thread about the CGI being soulless and maybe thereā€™s something to that theory. I really donā€™t believe itā€™s the medium though, Iā€™m just not impressed by the stories. ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2011, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/166 "2011-03-15T19:16:00Z")
I hated the ā€œMad Maxā€ movies. ALL of them. _The Road Warrior_ included. It was crap heaped on top of crap with crap gravy and a bowl of crap for dessert. I hate them the way that Jewish people hate Hitler. Only more often. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2011, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/167 "2011-03-15T21:34:30Z")
> [@Sakuma\_Drops](#): > > This movie (the Tim Burton one) bugged the hell out of me. Usually movies that stray from the book donā€™t bother me but I remember people making a point of saying that THIS movie was sooooo much closer to the book than the original movie which it absolutely was not. I suppose thatā€™s what really bothered me, because I wondered if some people saying that even read the book at all. > > First of all, the whole thread about Wonkaā€™s childhood ā€œtraumaā€ and his moster dentist father wasnā€™t in the book, and Willy Wonka as he was originally written was NOT the creepy, emotionally-stunted man from the Burton movie. Second, in the book Charlie loves his Grandpa Joe and he isnā€™t just window-dressing. Overall I didnā€™t care for Freddie Highmoreā€™s Charlie. I think I heard some people complain that the Charlie in the old movie was too pitiful, but in the book the situation with his family is even _bleaker_ than in the movie (in that they were very much on the brink of starvation), so for me itā€™s not a big deal. > > I still recommend reading the book. Its mood and sense of humor, I think, is much closer to that in the old movie. Willy Wonka is a lot moreā€¦spry, and doesnā€™t spend his time brooding and lamenting the trappings of his youth. I have to defend this. My reasons for saying it is closer to the book are the fact that it showed the kids at the end, the fact that Wonka is not some super happy guy, thereā€™s no gobstopper test nor fake Slugsworth, they actually show the squirrel room, the Oompa-Loompas are the right size and skin color, that guy from India is there, they sang the songs from the book, and the entire thing was made more fantastic looking. Oh, and everything they added was clearly segregated from the book parts. The part I underlined is the one I find the most incredible and the first thing I noticed, even if, by itself, it would mean nothing. As for the OP: All Iā€™ve got is _Meet the Parents_. Everyone told me it was hilarious, but it is not my type of humor. I donā€™t like it when the main character is being made to feel uncomfortable, nor do I find uncomfortableness inherently funny. ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2011, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/168 "2011-03-15T23:39:11Z")
> [@Eutychus](#): > > **TheCat in the Hat** ā€¦ how Ron Howard could completely suck the charm out of a Dr. Suess book is beyond me! Ron Howard had nothing to do with _The Cat In The Hat_, that was directed by Bo Welch, his first film. Ron Howard made the _Grinch_ film, which was decent but, because it was based on such a beloved cartoon, was inevitably going to be unfavourably compared. ---
**Author:** ![Sakuma\_Drops](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/50afbb/32.png) [@Sakuma\_Drops](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sakuma_Drops)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2011, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/169 "2011-03-16T18:01:10Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I have to defend this. My reasons for saying it is closer to the book are the fact that it showed the kids at the end Uh, okay, but IIRC in the old movie Wonka did say something to the effect of ā€œtheyā€™ll all go back to their horrible, normal selvesā€¦but perhaps a little wiserā€, which is really all the four other kids get in the book, too (just a reassurance to Charlie that they would be okay) > [@](#): > > the fact that Wonka is not some super happy guy Well, he isnā€™t really in the old movie, either. Heā€™s definitely off-kilter and gets visibly irritated several times when he thinks one of his inventions might be compromised (like when Augustus falls into the chocolate river). My problem with Burtonā€™s Wonka is that heā€™s basically a Michael Jackson parody: creepy and childlike (but not in good ways, just that heā€™s emotionally immature), broods a lot, etc. > [@](#): > > thereā€™s no gobstopper test nor fake Slugsworth That was the biggest thematic change from the book and they probably wanted to add an angle to make Charlie have some sort of internal conflict and not just ā€œwinā€ the factory. I donā€™t mind it personally but I can see how others would take issue with it. > [@](#): > > , they actually show the squirrel room, Thatā€™s fine, I think probably this has more to do with the technical limitations of the time the first movie was made (they had no way to make CGI squirrels and so the goose room was easier to do). Both scenes serve Verucaā€™s storyline well, IMO. > [@](#): > > the Oompa-Loompas are the right size and skin color, that guy from India is there, they sang the songs from the book, Thatā€™s all fine. Iā€™m not sure why they didnā€™t just use the bookā€™s song lyrics in the old movie. And the choclate palace scene might have been another victim of the technical limitations of 1970. > [@](#): > > Oh, and everything they added was clearly segregated from the book parts. Wellā€¦maybe not everything. My biggest single issue from the Burton movie is the sub-plot involving Wonkaā€™s father and his traumatic childhood. You can like or dislike that they added this angle, but itā€™s not the sort of thing Roald Dahl would have written. He didnā€™t tend to write characters that are so traumatized from their upbringing that theyā€™re dysfunctional; look at _Matilda_ which has two very badly-treated protagonists who are still basically normal people. Thereā€™s basically no consideration of internal conflict in his characters: for better or worse theyā€™re either well-behaved, clever, and virtuous, or mean-spirited, prim, and deserving of punishment. Also, in the book Wonka isnā€™t the focus of the story: the kids are. He (and the factory) serve as means to separate the good kid (Charlie) from the bad ones. While it might be interesting to explore his motivations, the book hardly touched on anything other than ā€œthis guy really likes to make chocolate.ā€ Iā€™m not one to say that Burton didnā€™t have the right to make his movie however he wanted. And I acknowledge that the old movie strayed from the book in some key ways as well. But Burtonā€™s movie introduced some serious thematic changes as well as cosmetic ones, and to claim that itā€™s an exceedingly faithful adaptation of the book is a little far-fetched. Itā€™s very clearly _Burtonā€™s_ interpretation, his mark is all over it. While he was able to include some scenes from the book that the old movie didnā€™t (or couldnā€™t), he also made changes of his own. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2011, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/170 "2011-03-16T18:47:14Z")
> [@Chopper9760](#): > > It makes me feel like a curmudgeonly asshole but I donā€™t like any of the computer animated kidsā€™ movies. > > Toy Story, Shrek, UP, WALL-E, and the like. > > Someone recently started a thread about the CGI being soulless and maybe thereā€™s something to that theory. I really donā€™t believe itā€™s the medium though, Iā€™m just not impressed by the stories. Iā€™m with you. Every one Iā€™ve seen was manipulative and formulaic. Which I suppose is fine for kids, but Iā€™m an adult. ---
**Author:** ![Student\_Driver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3da27b/32.png) [@Student\_Driver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Student_Driver)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2011, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/171 "2011-03-16T19:02:02Z")
These films werenā€™t exactly screaming ā€œqualityā€ to begin with, but I was still shocked by them. I was incredibly surprised at how bad _Still Waitingā€¦_ was. \*Waitingā€¦\*was a bit amateurish, but often funny, a _Clerks_-like slice-of-life comedy that rang true for my own experience working in a restaurant. The sequel, though, holy crap it was bad. A friend bought it and brought it into work, popped it into the DVD player on lunch, and we decided half an hour in to shut it off and watch the local weather service instead. _Employee of the Month_ was awful, though not as cringe-worthy as the above. I wasnā€™t expecting a masterpiece, but since I work big-box retail, I was expecting a movie that would have funny moments that would ring true (again, like _Clerks_). Instead, not only was the story itself pretty bad, but the writers seemed to know nothing about how big-box retail actually worked. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2011, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/172 "2011-03-16T19:57:25Z")
> [@Student\_Driver](#): > > _Employee of the Month_ was awful, though not as cringe-worthy as the above. I wasnā€™t expecting a masterpiece, but since I work big-box retail, I was expecting a movie that would have funny moments that would ring true (again, like _Clerks_). Instead, not only was the story itself pretty bad, but the writers seemed to know nothing about how big-box retail actually worked. Are you talking about the one with Dane Cook and Jessica Simpson or the one with Matt Dillon and Christina Applegate? ---
**Author:** ![Student\_Driver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3da27b/32.png) [@Student\_Driver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Student_Driver)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2011, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/173 "2011-03-16T20:10:50Z")
Cook/Simpson. Never heard of the latter oneā€¦ is it any better? ---
**Author:** ![Doctor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Doctor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doctor)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2011, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/174 "2011-03-16T20:12:35Z")
I saw Twilight with some friends without knowing much about it at the time ā€“ thank Og on home video ā€“ and being told how ā€œawesomeā€ Twilight was. I gave up on it after an hour. The acting was _so bad_ I could not stand it. I mean, I have a pretty high threshold for crap movies (for example, I loved the GI Joe movie - I knew exactly what I was going to get and it did not disappoint, but it was a bad movie, really), but I wanted drive a stake through ā€œBellaā€ and her creepy vampire friend by the time that first hour had finished. Ugh. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2011, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/175 "2011-03-16T20:51:47Z")
> [@Student\_Driver](#): > > Cook/Simpson. Never heard of the latter oneā€¦ is it any better? Hell no. I reference it in the ā€œWorst Endingsā€ thread. ---
**Author:** ![DCnDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dcndc/32/2842_2.png) [@DCnDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DCnDC)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2011, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/176 "2011-03-16T20:54:09Z")
_Resident Evil: Afterlife_. Not that I was necessarily expecting a great movie, and not that the others in the series were amazing or anything, but I enjoyed the previous 3 films in the series and was very disappointed by the utter crappiness of this latest offering. Thereā€™s simply no conceivable reason for the Umbrella Corporation to be _that_ comically evil, even with a mutated, evil CEO. ---
**Author:** ![Sakuma\_Drops](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/50afbb/32.png) [@Sakuma\_Drops](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sakuma_Drops)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2011, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/177 "2011-03-16T21:21:57Z")
> [@Doctor](#): > > I saw Twilight with some friends without knowing much about it at the time ā€“ thank Og on home video ā€“ and being told how ā€œawesomeā€ Twilight was. I gave up on it after an hour. The acting was _so bad_ I could not stand it. I mean, I have a pretty high threshold for crap movies (for example, I loved the GI Joe movie - I knew exactly what I was going to get and it did not disappoint, but it was a bad movie, really), but I wanted drive a stake through ā€œBellaā€ and her creepy vampire friend by the time that first hour had finished. Ugh. Iā€™ve been told that the Rifftrax (MST3K-style) treatment of _Twilight_ is quite good. Thatā€™s probably the best circumstance to watch it under. ---
**Author:** ![Superhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2011, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/178 "2011-03-17T01:07:37Z")
> [@DCnDC](#): > > _Resident Evil: Afterlife_. > > Not that I was necessarily expecting a great movie, and not that the others in the series were amazing or anything, but I enjoyed the previous 3 films in the series and was very disappointed by the utter crappiness of this latest offering. Thereā€™s simply no conceivable reason for the Umbrella Corporation to be _that_ comically evil, even with a mutated, evil CEO. Did you see it in the theaters? We were trying to figure out how much worse it would have been in 3D. ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2011, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/179 "2011-03-17T01:14:57Z")
double post ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2011, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196/180 "2011-03-17T01:17:30Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > Iā€™m with you. Every one Iā€™ve seen was manipulative and formulaic. Which I suppose is fine for kids, but Iā€™m an adult. Could you give some examples of the films you do find entertaining, and that are not manipulative and formulaic? I canā€™t think of a single movie in the history of cinema that wasnā€™t both on some level. And also, yā€™know, so we can return the favor of spitting on something you enjoy (even as lighthearted fare) and implying youā€™re stupid. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-you-didnt-expect-to-suck-so-bad/574196.md?page=10)