Your help needed!

Back in March, I asked you, my lovely readers, about your least favourite songs ever. I always knew you were an opinionated bunch, and your input on this subject really was such fun to read and respond to – which meant that I enjoyed writing the resulting post so much that I have decided to try the experiment again.

Inspired by a conversation on Twitter about my personal favourite bad film (Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves – yes, I know…) and a suggestion made by one of my readers, I decided that the next topic for you lot to get your teeth into would indeed be bad films.

More specifically, I want to hear your views on bad films, bad performances and bad actors. Here’s a few pertinent questions for you to contemplate:

How would you define a bad film?

Is there a difference between a bad film and one you actively dislike? Why?

What is your most hated film? Why?

Have you ever walked out of a movie at the cinema because it was so bad?

What film was it?

What made you walk out?

Are there some ‘bad films’ that are actually good?

Do you have a ‘guilty pleasure’ – a bad movie that you secretly (or not so secretly!) love?

And are there some films that are so bloody awful that they don’t even fall into the ‘so bad it’s good’ category?

What’s the worst, most ‘phoned in’ and/or overplayed performance you’ve ever seen in a movie?

Are there any actors or actresses who are particularly guilty of the above?

Worst accents?

Worst scripts, direction, costumes etc?

Feel free to answer as many or as few questions as you want! Getting involved is simple – leave your answers in a comment here, or join in the debate on the Another Kind Of Mind Facebook page.

Oh, and if you’re looking for inspiration, I recommend you check out FUMB Films, where you’ll find one man’s reviews of some really, really, really bad movies…

Bookmark and Share

Advertisements

42 comments

  1. lol

    Pret a Porter is my most hated film of all time – its terrible on so many levels, bad script, bad acting, a runway full of naked models couldn’t save it, and it was so incredibly smug and undeservedly full of itself. It what the Player could have been if it had gone wrong. I can’t believe I sat through it. It is the standard against which I judge the relative crapness of movies.

    I’ve turned films off on DVD and video, but I’ve never walked out of the cinema, although I nearly walked out on Superman Returns – if I hadn’t been there with someone, I would have. Kevin Spacey really ruined an already shaky film with a performance that just showed no respect for the material, the genre or the audience. I think that may even be my most phoned in performance.

    Worst accents: Keanu in Dracula, Sean Connery in Hunt for Red October, or in fact anything where he’s not playing a guy from Edinburgh. Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins. Kevin Costner got it right – if you can’t do the accent, don’t try.

    The Phantom Menace – Yeah, I said it – such a build up of expectation, it had to be good, or else any suckage would be magnified exponentially. It sucks and blows. “A firework display of a toy advert”

    Borat – couldn’t watch past the first 10 minutes, but I just don’t like cringe-comedy.

    Robert de Niro – learnt some French for Ronin (I think) then seemed to find any excuse to use it himn his next couple of films. Not a great sin, but it pissed me off a bit

    Legally Blonde 1 & 2, why God why? I watched 1, but couldn’t hack 2.

    How the hell did we end up with a Transporter 3, or a Crank 2 for that matter?

    Rant drive just spinning up to speed now…

    John Travolta, please go back to obscurity now, you made some good stuff when Tarantino resuscitated your career, but now you’re bordering on self parody in every role. time to leave the party now fella

    Likewise Will Ferrell – I bought Talladega Nights because Anchorman had some good moments, now I feel like a right dick – its terrible. He’s OK for scene stealing cameos, but not to carry his own film

    Adam Sandler – is he still doing the same film over and over or has he stopped that? Happy Gilmore, Little Nicky, The Waterboy, Mr Deeds, they’re essentially the same film – I really couldn’t take 50 First Dates, it was painful, and I’m usualy a sucker for Rom Coms.

    Oh, and Robin Williams when he thought he could do pathos and only managed a trowelling of schmaltz. He is now in recovery after such films as One Hour Photo and Insomnia

    Ooh no, most phoned in performance – Nicholas Cage in Con Air, but that’s one of the things that makes the film watchable for me, the sheer air of boredom that he projects as he goes through the film is fantastic, so Spacey I think may still take the prize because his phoner had a detrimental effect on an already ropey film.

    Anyway, I have vented, its time for me to go and have a little lie down.

    My giulty pleasures by the way, are Rom Coms and schlock actioners, so I do have the opportunity to see a lot of shit in these genres.

    Was this the sort of thing that you were after?

    • trickygirl

      That’s exactly the sort of thing I was after – I knew you wouldn’t let me down! :)

        • trickygirl

          After the mess that was ‘Jersey Girl’, I haven’t even dared go near ‘Clerks 2’…. Didn’t really see the point of it anyway – why mess around with something that’s already been done, and done so damn well?

  2. lol

    Its very existence negates the ending of Clerks for me – I felt that Dante had actually had a day bad enough that he does finally open the potty lid and move on with his life, so Clerks 2’s craps all over that notion just by being made.

    • lol

      ANd how could I go through a rant like that without mentioning my hatred of Moulin Rouge. I really loathe that film, but its no Pret a Porter…

      • trickygirl

        The only thing that makes ‘Moulin Rouge’ even remotely worth while for me is Kylie as the Absinthe Fairy!

    • trickygirl

      Exactly. The ending of ‘Clerks’ neatly wraps the story up – there really was no opening for a sequel (unlike, say, the ending of the original ‘Italian Job’). Much as I love Kevin Smith for just being Kevin Smith, his last two or three films have all smacked of being made for the money and not for the love of creating and making people laugh.

  3. shmoo7275

    Ooookay! Some very interesting questions there. Firstly, I’ll quickly agree with Lol about Kevin Spacey’s oh-so-lazy turn as Lex Luthor in Superman Returns. In many ways the whole movie smacked of laziness, being a rehash of the 1977 Superman as much as a sequel.
    I suppose I see a film as being bad when it fails in its objectives – of course, what I perceive as the film’s objectives may not be what the film-makers had in mind! For example, I’d say Elizabeth is a terrible film because it was intended to be an accurate historical depiction of her reign and, as such, it failed. On the other hand, a film like Daredevil isn’t especially bad – it ticked all the boxes I wanted it to tick – but I didn’t enjoy it.
    As far as the old “so bad it’s good” debate goes – I don’t get it. Never have, never will. Sure, something can be laughably bad for a couple of minutes but to actually sit through ninety minutes plus of crap because it’s somehow funny – that makes no sense to me. Bad is bad.
    Interview With the Vampire is a terrible movie that somehow seems to have got well regarded. It’s reasonably faithful to the book but somehow manages to suck (npi) the life out of it. I never understood the appeal of The Lion King.
    One of my pet peeves is movies that won’t make up their mind. Take Sam Raimi’s “Drag Me to Hell”. He spends most of the movie making a competent, if unambitious, straight horror movie, then, in the last twenty minutes, can’t resist diving straight into Raimi Evil Dead comedy mode. It ruins the movie. It can’t work as a comedy, there’s just not enough jokes in it but as a horror it’s kind of ruined when you belly laugh during the supposedly climactic scene!
    A similar problem can be found in the remake of “Cape Fear”. It’s played very well, directed very well but right at the end DeNiro’s character becomes an indestructible monster, a common problem in movies about killers. Film-makers can’t help making their villains survive ridiculous amounts of punishment, thinking it makes them scarier when in fact it just breaks the mood. Now, if you establish to me that DeNiro’s character is, in fact, undead from the outset I might go with it.
    Some movies are very disappointing without actually being bad. “Godfather 3” is not a really bad movie – it’s not that great either- but given what people expected from the franchise it fell so far short that people generally describe it as being absolutely terrible. It’s great rival in disappointment, “The Phantom Menace”, on the other hand, I feel would have been judged harshly even without the expectation.
    Some movies suffer through sheer similarity. “Casino” is a good film, unless you’ve already seen “Goodfellas”.
    I don’t really have any guilty pleasures but I do have weaknesses for certain things. Martial arts in particular thrill me and I will forgive a lot – poor acting, plotting, continuity and so on – in a martial arts movie with truly skilled protagonists that I would not necessarily tolerate in a lot of other movies. That’s why I’ve watched so many Cynthia Rothrock, Chuck Norris and Steven Seagal films!
    A special mention has to go to “The Untouchables” whenever I’m discussing bad films. Flawed in every way imaginable, from the ludicrous performance of Connery, to the historical innacuracies in the story, the cartoonish portrayal of some of the nastiest gangsters in American history, the overblown length and the self-indulgent “it’s tough on a relationship” subplot, I have never understood why so many people like this. To me, this doesn’t seem merely a film that rubs me up the wrong way, it’s actively poor.
    I suppose that’ll do for now!

    • trickygirl

      It’s interesting; I made some notes on the films and actors that I thought might come up in people’s replies, and Connery was top of that list…! But we seem to forgive him for his lack of ability with accents and the fact that he always basically plays himself because of the cultural status of those iconic Bond films (some of which are, ironically, actually bloody awful).

      ‘Godfather 3’ is an interesting movie, and I think you’re right in saying that it crumbled somewhat under the weight of expectations. The third part of a trilogy is always the tough bit, especially after two such all-time classics, and this one doesn’t really work. It’s not a work of genius, but it’s not truly dire either.

      Thanks for your answers!

    • lol

      “One of my pet peeves is movies that won’t make up their mind. Take Sam Raimi’s “Drag Me to Hell”. He spends most of the movie making a competent, if unambitious, straight horror movie, then, in the last twenty minutes, can’t resist diving straight into Raimi Evil Dead comedy mode. It ruins the movie. It can’t work as a comedy, there’s just not enough jokes in it but as a horror it’s kind of ruined when you belly laugh during the supposedly climactic scene!”

      And yet Peter Jackson’s “The Frighteners” switches from being an out and out comedy to being quite creepy towards the end and is non the wqorse for it. But I realise that one counter examplke doesn’t disprove your point in general (Isn’t that what “the exception proves the rule” actually means anyway, with “prove” meaning “to test”in this context – or did I dream that?)

  4. Ziggy

    Thanks for the new chance to rant, and especially about such a much-loved topic. I will always be drawn into a film debate, no matter where and when.

    I have actually walked out on a film. Once in Copenhagen me and my friends went to see “Stakeout” (remember that?- yes, it’s a few years ago). Unfortunately I bought tickets for the wrong film, and we sat down to watch a film called “Time Out”, a B-movie, which I believe was a Danish production, but where they had persuaded a few international actors to participate.
    The film was so awful that we all lasted less then 30 minutes. Then we walked out.

    Let me start with one of my favourite topics; How totally overrated Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder are as actors. I will give you this: In one or two films they have performed a touch above mediocre, but those were films with exceptional manuscripts and directors. Mostly, they both perform like teenagers at a village theatre fayre. And don’t EVER give them parts, where they have to put on an accent or portray emotions with any complexity.
    You all remember “Much ado about Nothing”? This Shakespeare adaptation had Keanu Reeves and Denzel Washington performing the words of the Bard in super-Hollywood drawl, next to immaculate performances by Shakespearian actors such as Brian Blessed and Imelda Staunton. Cringe!!

    I will give Winona “Girl Interrupted”, but she mostly has to play apathetic in that, so perhaps that’s why she does OK. “The Age of Innocence” for example is painful, as is “Taxi Night on Earth”.
    And, as Lol mentions, “Dracula” bosts the two of them. I do like that film, but mostly for Gary Oldman. Winona and Keanu… what can I say.. aaaaaaaaaarrrgh!!

    Another Hollywood superstar who generally overacts to a painful degree is Johnny Depp. How he landed an Oscar nomination for Jack Sparrow is totally beyond me. I could hardly watch.
    “Fear and Loathing…” is a favourite of mine (why wouldn’t it be), but I can’t help thinking that with a better actor it could have been an absolute masterpiece. He’s not always bad, though, but I think it really makes a difference who directs him. His gorgeousness seems to have found a perfect match in Tim Burton, whose films are such explosions of extravaganza, we hardly notice Johnny grimacing like a miniacal monkey most of the time.

    I watched the first Twilight film recently, and I thought that girl, Kristen Stewart, was phenomenal. Why couldn’t she have been the Winona of my generation? Just imagine her being persued through the fog-swollen cobbled streets of London by Gary Oldman.. wow! She does breathless like noone else. Now imagine Tom Hardy (Bronson) as Jonathan Harker… mmmmmm we might have had something there…I digress!!

    Food for thought? Enough for now.

    • trickygirl

      Feel free to rant away! Thanks for your comments :)

      Yeah, that version of ‘Much Ado…’ is bloody awful. Not even the proper Shakespearean ac-tors can save that one!

      I think the problem with Johnny Depp is that he’s lost the balance in the films he chooses to do – he needs to go back and do a few more low-budget, lo-fi movies that require him to actually act rather than just pull faces in Hollywood blockbusters.

      And as for ‘Fear and Loathing…’, well, it was never going to be easy to find any actor who could convincingly play Hunter S Thompson; the man was a total one off, utterly unique…

      Tim Burton (and I’m a fan) has got more and more theatrical and over-the-top with his film-making in recent years. It’s all about surface these days, no depth. His movies used to have other layers to them, but the more recent ones seem to be all shiny and crude. The result of years of exposure to ever-increasing amounts of studio money?

    • lol

      Kristen Stewart phenomenal? she is utterly expressionless!

      I’m with you on Johnny Depp’s overacting though…

      • trickygirl

        And the more of a Hollywood super-mega-star Johnny Depp becomes, the more he overacts….

  5. samlonghorn

    First up, thanks for the plug :)
    I’ve been a bit lazy on the blog scene recently with other things (some thing called “keeping fit” and another known as “work”), but I’ve got a few things lined up to review soon!

    So, to answers your questions:

    How would you define a bad film?

    Something that fails on every level that it set itself up for. And now just little failures like the ending being bad, or a twist you saw a mile away, or seeing Ben Affleck’s expanding gut, or have the evil Nic Cage rather than the good Nic Cage….I’m talking about FAIL after FAIL after FAIL. Some films know they’re bad – they set out to be bad/cheesy etc. so they have some success. However, films like “Law Abiding Citizen” think they are something that they’re clearly not – a film that thinks it’s a “message” film.

    Other factors that determine a bad film:

    Directed by Eli Roth
    Starring Jennifer Aniston
    From the Mind of M. Night Shyamalan
    A Michael Bay film…

    Is there a difference between a bad film and one you actively dislike? Why?

    Very much so, though I actively dislike many films that are plain bad (“Cabin Fever” and “Hostel” for example). Take for instance “A Clockwork Orange” and “The Exorcist”. I actively dislike both these films for different reasons but would never call them bad films.

    What is your most hated film? Why?

    “Cabin Fever” – do I actually need a reason to hate this pile of crap?? Okay…well, it’s an awful pastiche of horror films and isn’t in the least bit scary. It’s terribly directed and has the suspense of a broken tightrope. It also ruined what was actually a decent idea.
    Though I have turned my recent hatred to “Law Abiding Citizen”.

    Have you ever walked out of a movie at the cinema because it was so bad?
    What film was it?
    What made you walk out?

    Yes….”Look Who’s Talking” – I couldn’t bear it any more. I sat in the lobby and waited for my family.

    Are there some ‘bad films’ that are actually good?

    Hell yeah. Most of them are horror or creature features though. I don’t think I have (or ever will) see a rom-com that is so bad it is good.

    Do you have a ‘guilty pleasure’ – a bad movie that you secretly (or not so secretly!) love?

    “Cutting Class” – this marked the debut of one Bradley Pitt. I recommend that everyone gets hold of this and watches it.

    And are there some films that are so bloody awful that they don’t even fall into the ‘so bad it’s good’ category?

    Two films I’ve already mentioned spring instantly to mind…..

    What’s the worst, most ‘phoned in’ and/or overplayed performance you’ve ever seen in a movie?
    Are there any actors or actresses who are particularly guilty of the above?

    Recently, Nic Cage’s “performance” in “Knowing” made me want to extend the ‘phoned in’ metaphor to include a circumnavigation of the globe in an envelope. But Cage is guilty of this all too often these days – though he’s hardly picky with the material so it’s no surprise that he plays dull Nic Cage these days.

    As for overplayed? Al Pacino in “Heat” – and that’s one of my favourite films.

    Worst accents?

    Richard Gere – The Jackal
    Natasha McElnhoe & Jonathan Pryce – Ronin

    These ones always stand out for me – I think it’s the Irish accent that is fouled up the most times though. It’s like their source material is a Lucky Charms advert and the “Leprechaun” film series. There are obviously stacks of terrible Russian accents plaguing films (which is probably why the makers of “Enemy At The Gate” decided to not insist that their actors speak the accent and instead made half the Russian army at Stalingrad sound Cockney). I watched a Steven Seagal film recently where he tries a Russian accent. That was an eye opener…

    Worst scripts, direction, costumes etc?

    Worst script recently was “I Am Legend” – Akiva Goldsman is a plain and simple Hollywood hack – gets paid a fortune to churn out Hollywood friendly scripts. The script he wrote for “I Am Legend” was not Richard Matheson’s “I Am Legend” it was Akiva Goldsman’s “Will Smith is the Last Man Alive and is Hunted by Vampires”. He missed the point of the book plain and simple and saw the cash cow of a franchise rather that be faithful.

    Worst direction – I could pick on Eli Roth here again, but I’m going to say George Lucas for The Phantom Menace. And I don’t need to explain why….

    I could go on and on all night here…..;)

    • trickygirl

      Some really interesting points there!

      I’d have to disagree with you about ‘The Exorcist’ though – not only do I dislike it, I think it’s a genuinely bad film and it hasn’t dated well at all. The original source book is much, much scarier than the film version. Frankly, it all looks a bit silly these days.

      Russian accents sound hammy in Hollywood even when they’re done by actual Russians, and Irish accents should be avoided by actors at all costs.

      The mere idea of Steven Seagal attempting a Russian accent made bits of my brain explode. That’s a singularly disturbing concept…

      • samlonghorn

        I guess with The Exorcist I could hate it more – but I actually haven’t seen it for about 20 years now! Even as a 14 year old I disliked it. I guess the fact that it is held in such high regard by a number of people sways me away from calling it a genuinely bad film. But, when you compare it to two other horror classics like “The Haunting” and “Don’t Look Now” it is just nowhere.

        If you’re interested in Seagal’s Russian accent, then watch “Driven To Kill” – this is how I described the accent in my review:

        Imagine if The Godfather was about the Russian mob and they’d got Seagal to play Marlon Brando’s role with the same husky drawl – yes, that’s pretty much the accent that Seagal has, erm,”nailed” here.

        Really shockingingly bad!

        • trickygirl

          ‘Don’t Look Now’ is a genuinely creepy film. I’ve seen it a couple of times now and it still leaves an undefinable sense of dread behind it, even after the credits roll. That’s how you do properly scary horror!

          Oh god – Seagal does Brando as a Russian mobster…. I take it the accent didn’t come close to even sounding Russian then!?

      • samlonghorn

        Yeah, not many films come close to recreating “Don’t Look Now”.

        I’m not sure what accent it actually turns out as – something inherently wrong. It actually reminds me of this brilliant sketch by Tony Law: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=draZQ2upJZ0 – the bit where he starts going through the accents is just hilarious – he did a longer version of this at Green Man with more accents.

    • lol

      “Directed by Eli Roth
      Starring Jennifer Aniston
      From the Mind of M. Night Shyamalan
      A Michael Bay film…”

      I would add “A Spike Lee joint” to that list as well…

      • trickygirl

        Spike Lee is mostly over-rated as a director, but I still really like ‘Summer of Sam’ (featuring an interesting performance from a very young-looking Adrien Brody) – it has a bit more depth and thought behind it than the vast majority of Lee’s other films.

  6. Lizz

    How would you define a bad film?

    One which didn’t make me believe. One which didn’t leave me feeling in some way satisfied.

    There have been a couple which have been so awful I had face ache from cringing. Batman and Robin was one – George Clooney was awful, and he was probably the best one of the lot. Van Helsing was another.

    Then there are the ones that blew away my preconceptions in all the wrong ways. Such as The Break Up. Ummm, if I wanted a romcom that didn’t follow the formula, I’d watch a drama. It had all the ingredients for a proper romcom but disappointed on every level. I haven’t forgiven it yet. It’s possibly the only romcom I didn’t enjoy at all (even Bridget Jones 2 had its moments, and that was mainly awful because the first one was so good in comparison).

    However, I am a terrible person to judge a bad movie – I have watched and enjoyed many of Errol Flynn’s later movies, which are almost universally panned by people who know what they are talking about.

    • trickygirl

      I wouldn’t worry about liking Errol Flynn’s later output, my favourite Bond film is still ‘On Her Majesty’s Secret Service’ (the George Lazenby one), despite family members who insist that “Bond should never wear cardigans”….!

      The Batman franchise had well and truly lost its way by the point pf ‘Batman and Robin’ (and probably even before that); Clooney was dire. I’ve always managed to avoid ‘Van Helsing’ – sounds like I’ve been lucky in that respect!

  7. Grant

    How would you define a bad film?

    One that just doesn’t engage me or one that takes absolute liberties with reality and/or the universe that the film is based in.

    Is there a difference between a bad film and one you actively dislike? Why?

    The difference for me is that a bad film is bad, even if you enjoy the subject matter. A film you actively dislike is usually one that is OK, but the subject matter/acting/pacing just utterly jars with you.

    What is your most hated film? Why? Amelié. It’s like being fed treacle with a bag of sugar chaser. I’ve never seen a film that was more like a 40 year old office secretary going “I’m well kooky, me but with a heart of gold”

    Have you ever walked out of a movie at the cinema because it was so bad?

    No. I’ve wanted to. Austin Powers 2 for the whole time. Wolverine and Iron Man 2 BECAUSE THEY JUST CAN’T STOP FUCKING UP MY FAVOURITE CHARACTERS TO PANDER TO THE MASSES!!! *pant*

    What film was it? See above.

    What made you walk out? OK, I can understand slight edits for storytelling purposes. Wolverine, OK, Deadpool doesn’t have swords coming out of his arms, but he does use swords, so I can let that go. Healing factor? Check. No problem. Wraith’s teleporting ability? No, but he’s got a teleport device, so OK, that’s fine. Cyclops’ eye blasts? NO NO NO NO JUST FUCKING NO! HE’S NEVER EVER DEMONSTRATED THAT ABILITY IN THE COMICS SO WHY NOW???.

    Iron Man 2: SINCE WHEN DID HAMMER WORK ON WAR MACHINE?? TONY STARK DESIGNED WAR MACHINE TO DEAL WITH HAMMER! FUUUUUUUUCCCKKK OFFFFFF!

    Are there some ‘bad films’ that are actually good?

    God yes. Alien 3: Directors Cut. Utterly panned, yet the best of the Quadrology.

    Do you have a ‘guilty pleasure’ – a bad movie that you secretly (or not so secretly!) love?

    Yep. Razor Blade Smile and Hitman

    And are there some films that are so bloody awful that they don’t even fall into the ‘so bad it’s good’ category?

    Critters 3, I Know Who Killed Me.

    What’s the worst, most ‘phoned in’ and/or overplayed performance you’ve ever seen in a movie?

    Sean Connery in The Rock

    Are there any actors or actresses who are particularly guilty of the above?

    Liev Schreiber. The Manchurian Candiate, Scream, Wolverine, I could go on…

    Worst accents?

    Keanu Reeves’ English accent for Dracula, Sean Connery’s Scottish at any point.

    Worst scripts, direction, costumes etc?

    Worst scripts have to be most comic book films. They go too much towards the audience, not the subject matter.

    Direction? Anything Michael Bay has touched.

    I’d like to also point out that the Shawshank Redemption is #2 on my most hated list too

    • trickygirl

      Thanks for your comment!

      With you on the taking liberties with specific universes – I’m a bit of a Tolkien geek and was slightly anxious prior to ‘Fellowship of the Ring’ as to how Peter Jackson would manage the story as well as the context of Middle Earth… Fortunately, I needn’t have worried!

      Like you, I can understand edits/conflations for storytelling purposes which actually work and which are within films that otherwise remain faithful to the original source (see LOTR again, and also ‘Trainspotting’), but when you’re dealing with source material like the X-Men comics, which are so well-loved by so many people, you just don’t fuck with them. Ever! You might as well be making a totally different movie with a totally different plot and characters…

      And as for Keanu Reeves in ‘Dracula’… I kept expecting him to go into Bill & Ted “Woah” mode every five seconds in that film, he was dreadful. Lovely to look at but can’t act for crap! Then there’s the scene where he’s ‘seduced’ by the Brides of Dracula and you get that (probably unintentionally) hilarious overhead shot of him writhing about on the bed. That provoked a severe case of the giggles in me when I saw that at the cinema, and I wasn’t the only one laughing…

      • Grant

        *explodes*

        The new one makes me mad too. Chris Evans as Cap? You need an older guy on there!

        Yet, I loved Constantine, despite it being absolutely fuck all like the comic book.

      • Grant

        That was so disappointing. Classic ‘We’re trying to sell it to America so let’s have an American historical character or token black guy in it’.

        Don’t get me started on Batman Begins, Transformers or Daredevil.

  8. Grant

    OK, my top 10 worst films ever

    1. Amelie
    2. The Shawshank Redemption
    3. Titanic
    4. The Rock
    5. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
    6. Hostel
    7. Mama Mia
    8. Ghost Rider
    9. Saw 3
    10. Charlie & The Chocolate Factory (remake)

    Also, I’d like to put in another candidate for bad, overplayed acting role: Johnny Depp in Pirates of the Caribbean. Terrible, Gary Oldman would have done it so much better. Like this…. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qQvXawnmjk

    • trickygirl

      Ooh, there’s some dreadful ones there!

      I despise ‘Titanic’ with every fibre of my being; it’s sentimental, badly-written and historically innaccurate tosh, and it gets me quite irrational!

      The ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’ remake was alright, but not a patch on the psychedelic and slightly creepy Gene Wilder original, which is an insanely brilliant film. Interestingly, Roald Dahl himself didn’t like the original, but I think it captures the unpleasant undertones of his book really well (unlike the remake…)

      Is it possible that I’m the only person in the world who HASN’T seen ‘The Shawshank Redemption’? And am I right in thinking that it’s one of the most over-rated movies ever made?

      ‘Saw’ was a clever film (I didn’t see the twist at the end coming, and I’m normally quite good at spotting those), but the producers really should have quit while they were ahead – there was no real need for one sequel, let alone however many it is now!

      I can just see Gary Oldman as Jack Sparrow. It would be a much more sinister character in his hands. I’ll check that link out, thanks!

      • lol

        I really liked “The Shawshank Redemption”, but I went into it with absolutely no preconceptions either way, as I don’t read much Stephen King.

        “Saw” was a pile of wank and the twist at the end was just beyond the believavlbe, I thought.

        Gary Oldman would have made a good Cap’n Jack – Johnny Depp’s version kinda reminds me of Gary Oldman in Leon, but slightly less homicidal.

  9. Grant

    Christ! How could I forget??? Worst performance EVER? Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight. Woeful. No menace, no sense of madness, just some hack overacting.

  10. shmoo7275

    Ok, just to spice things up a bit…few people are as X-Men batty as I am (cbrs of every comic featuring ANY of the X-Men from 1963 to 2000) but I liked Wolverine. It took liberties with the source material – big deal. When did they promise not to? Don’t get me wrong – I totally sympathise with the anger directed at it but I don’t share it. Only when a film-maker promises a faithful adaptation and then screws with the source material (Coppola’s Dracula) does it grind my gears. Loved Batman Begins & the Dark Knight, loved Iron Man and Iron Man 2 even more. Shawshank Redemption is, in my opinion, definitely not over-rated. Great story, faultlessly and faithfully adapted into a great movie. If you didn’t like the story, don’t watch the film. Saw films are much of a muchness – if you like one, you’ll probably enjoy all, since they’re essentially the same movie over and over but, for me, they just strain credibility WAY too far.
    Just to provoke, regarding my second favourite comic character, Captain Anerica, when the Avengers thaw him out he’s only in his early to mid-twenties. It’s his “Man out of time” perspective that makes him seem older. What’s needed is an actor like Doctor Who’s Matt Smith who is young but can convey “oldness” – not suggesting for a second Matt Smith could play Cap, obviously!
    I also hate The Rock. Connery is the most over-rated actor in Hollywood history.

    • lol

      Yup, I’m with you on pretty much all of that.

      I liked Wolverine, thought it was better than the actual X-Men films, mostly because of other faults with the X-Men films – pacing, plot decisions such as killing Cyclops, Wolverine fixing everything ( at least in his movie he’s supposed to fix everything!)

      There have been certain films, such as Constantine, Val Kilmer’s Saint where I’ve waching, accepted that it is not actualy Constantine or the Saint and just enjoyed the film as a genre movie Constantine is one of my favourite movies, but it bears little or no resemblance to Hellblazer. Likewise the Twilight books and Films – don’t read/watch them as Vampire stories but as Teen Romance and you’ll enjoy them much more

      On Captain America, yeah, think you’re right. Any movie has to be better than the other Captain AMerica film – the bar’s set pretty low there!

      • Grant

        I see your point on Wolverine, I was just so utterly disappointed with what they did with Deadpool.

        And I should really agree on the faithful adaptations part, but again, I’m a fan of mostly minor characters and they seem to have the most crap done to them. (I’m praying they don’t include Psylocke in First Class).

        Sin City for most faithful adaptation perhaps?

        • trickygirl

          ‘Sin City’ – definitely. There’s a film made with the utmost respect for the original source material, and one that actually works…

      • trickygirl

        That’s a good point about non-specific genre movies, and I agree with you about ‘The Saint’. Once I’d got beyond the fact that this certainly wasn’t The Saint as I knew him, I quite enjoyed it as a fun actioner. I wonder if Hollywood would ever properly remake The Saint as a movie, sixties style and with a lead actor in the Roger Moore mold? Problem is, I can’t think of anyone these days who could play Simon Templer like Moore did…

  11. Pingback: Another Kind Of Update « Another Kind Of Mind
  12. Pingback: Horrible Hollywood: The Bad Movie Debate (Finally) Returns, Part 1 « Another Kind Of Mind