Worst movie of all time...

Oh, the humanity! So many wretched moments recalled here. Just to state my tastes up front, I adore godawful grade B old science fiction and horror movies. They were bad, but cheerfully bad and unpretentious. The movies I hate are the ones that pretend to quality.

Oh, yes, “Whore” with Theresa Russell. I kept watching, expecting it to slide over into self-parody. It didn’t; it just stayed pompous and overdone and awful.

And “Body of Evidence”; this was just soooo bad. (If this is the one with Madonna in it; it had ‘body’ in the title–natch.) It started out awful, then died, rolled over and stank.

BTW, these two were spectacularly dreadful and only cost part of the basic cable fee. If I’d paid cinema prices, I would have had to grab a rifle and head up the water tower.

Veb

What parent could ever forget the unfortunate, pathetic Matt LeBlanc star vehicle - “ED”. Him and a baseball playing monkey. What were they thinking???

I thought “Titanic” was effective, for one reason: It was based on a real event. Take that away from the movie, and it would have sucked.

But the truth of the matter is that the Titanic did indeed sink, and several thousand people drowned. And they KNEW well in advance that they were going to die. Just imagining that is bad enough.

Cameron did a superb job in recreating the ship. The special effects and setting were awesome. And he illustrated the class difference. As an audience, we could imagine ourselves in that situation and how we would feel in that situation.

What sucked was the storyline with Rose and Jack. It was contrived and maudlin. The acting was poor, IMO. No chemistry between the leads.

All in all it was good film that could have been awesome.

ENC Heel,

I think you’re certain to be disappointed by the answers people give to your question. You want people to name truly bad movies, but you ask them not to list B movies, just those made with some degree of professionalism.

The problem is that bad A movies are seldom entirely stinkers. They tend to be two- or two-and-a-half star films. Occasionally they sink to the level of one-and-a-half stars. The real stinkers, though, tend to be made by people new to the film industry, with unknown actors, and on tiny budgets. These are frequently one-, one-half-, and no-star films. They don’t get much distribution, and when they are seen, no one has any reason to think they should be great. They’re just forgotten except by the people who treasure bad films.

Every once in a while, a film made on a small budget is good. This doesn’t happen nearly as often as you might think. For every highly praised independent film that gets discovered at a film festival and then distributed to theaters, there’s a dozen mediocre films that even the festivals won’t touch.

Nearly all of the movies mentioned in this thread are major Hollywood productions. They aren’t terrible exactly, but they’re much worse than what should be possible with a large budget. Much of the comments about these films in this thread are hyperbole. Of course these films are third-rate, and we shouldn’t allow the PR that surrounds any Hollywood film to blind us to that fact, but they’re not the abominations that many posters have claimed.

Here’s my comments on some of the films that people have already mentioned. Incidentally, I have many film reviews already online at the following URL:
http://www.dcfilmsociety.org

Click on reviews and then on the individual film titles. Not all of the reviews are mine.

One of my pet peeves, as you can see in my review of it, is Good Will Hunting. Yes, there’s some decent acting and the direction is O.K., but the plot is ridiculous. The film is utterly ignorant about what real geniuses are like, and the therapy scenes are cliched. Matt Damon’s character is a jerk, and Minnie Driver’s is a doormat.

The acting is reasonably good in Titanic and the special effects are great, but the plot is worse than any other Oscar winner I’ve seen (and I’ve seen 43 of the 61 winners). They make the people on the Titanic act worse than they did in reality. I dislike rich people as much as anybody, but the fact is that for once they did act like gentlemen and ladies. People knew they were going to die, but they stepped aside to let others into the boats. Instead of filming a story about courage, James Cameron made a silly love story.

Starship Troopers, as I say in my review, is a gigantic act of prostitution on Paul Verhoeven’s part. He clearly despised Heinlein’s novel, so he put in the Nazi symbolism to show his contempt for the work.

I liked Ishtar. There was something downright surreal about Beatty and Hoffman’s characters. Not only were they the world’s worst wannabe songwriters, but by being in their late 40’s, they came across as the world’s most deluded wannabes.

Heat wasn’t terrible, but it’s certainly overrated. The best acting is not by De Niro, Pacino, or Kilmer, but by Diane Venora, Amy Brenneman, and Ashley Judd. Why isn’t Diane Venora a star?

I liked Joe Versus the Volcano.

The Full Monty is O.K., but not really Oscar-level material. It’s a highbrow Benny Hill sketch.

The English Patient is well acted, well directed, and even has some nice dialogue, but it’s based around a stupid idea. It’s like the anti-Casablanca. The feelings of two people are worth more than the outcome of World War II.

You’ve Got Mail is overrated for the reasons I detail in my review.

Austin Powers is nowhere near as funny as it’s supposed to be. I couldn’t force myself to see the sequel.

Meet Joe Black is a mess. MST3K would have a field day with it, since nearly every line is proceeded by pregnant pauses that make it easy to fit clever comments in. Try to make sense of the end of this film. What exactly is Claire Forlani’s character supposed to do when she goes back to the party? Is she supposed to tell people, “Thanks for coming to my father’s birthday party. He’d thank you himself, but he just died. Please meet my new boyfriend. He died in a car accident a couple of days ago, but he’s all better now.” Incidentally, when I saw the film in a movie theater, the audience actually cheered when Brad Pitt’s character got killed.

One that no one’s mentioned yet is Night Falls on Manhattan. It’s the most morally corrupt film I’ve ever seen. It actually claims that it’s all right for prosecutors and police to make up evidence, since all criminals are slime who don’t deserve any rights. See my review of this film.

Yes, Smilingjaws, Liam Neeson has been in a good movie or two (she said, dropping in late.) Remember Schindler’s List?

Also Rob Roy. Braw lad, that Liam :slight_smile:

Catrandom

A few entries for the category, the worst non-B movies…

Point Break - K. Reeves can’t act and P. Swayze should stick to his dancing. In fact, any movies with either of these two “actors” in it would be excellent candidates for this list (excluding Road House of course).

The Saint - Plain old bad acting, plot, storyline, etc. Isn’t it funny that most movies made about former TV shows are usually rank. I don’t think Hollywood ever heard the phrase “Television is a vast wasteland.” Maybe a TV show should be made about Road House to improve the television industry’s reputation.

Truth or Dare - Overindulgent and boring. On the plus side, the movie could have won an Oscar for costume design. By the way did I mention how upset I was that Road House didn’t receive any Academy Award nominations when it was released.

The Big Hit - AkA The Big Waste of time. Maybe it was me, I just didn’t get it. I think it was supposed to be camp or something.

That’s all I can think of right now. I have to go… Road House starts on TBS in 5 minutes.