h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Titanic is not the worst film ever - it's merely mediocre, combined with a level of hype which will guarantee that some people simply won't like it, no matter how good or bad it is.
Same with Charlie's Angels - I absolutely detested this film, but I know people who love it. It may be bad, but it's nowhere near bad enough to be worthy of being called 'Worst Movie Ever'.

Most low budget films should also be disqualified, simply because it should be considered a miracle if they are actually any good.


No, the truly bad films are created when a group of experienced, highly-qualified professional film-financiers and film-makers waste millions of dollars on pointless vanity projects, star vehicles for non-actors or unnecessary sequels.


Try watching these films if you dare:

Speed 2
Highlander 2
Mortal Combat 2 (what is it with sequels?)
Battlefield Earth
Fair Game (the film with Cindy Crawford in it)

As with most people's lists, this is not very extensive. Many films don't make the list because it was too obvious they were going to be rubbish, so I never watched them.

Just to warn you - don't even think of watching Charlies Angels 2 ! ,,, but how about adding Waterworld to your list ? Can't believe I actually watched the whole film - but back then, I still thought Kevin Costner was a good actor - yes, I know now..

I liked Fair Game - it's got Cindy Crawford s in it.

B

Another one for the list is "Congo", I think the name was, what a waste of time.

I can't really see how Waterworld would fit into this category, but hey....

American Psycho 2 looks like it's going to be really bad. And it's got Shatner in it. I am almost tempted to watch this.

BB

What about anything from the American Pie series which seems to keep growing with the latest one. Last time I watched a movie with that many sex jokes in it, it was a soft porn movie.

"American Psycho II"??? no no no no no! What are they thinking? Hardly anyone even went to see the first one! I did, and really liked it, but I can't IMAGINE a sequel.

try ignoring the its all a fantasy angle and then you can

the movie is painfull

My problem must be that I never noticed there *was* an "it's an a fantasy" angle.

I do think the majority of sequels are pretty bad, I know I've said it before but T3 has to be added to the list.

The trouble often with sequels is the only reason for making them is to make more money and not to tell a new story.

Can't remember who said it, but it does not matter how bad the images, sound and actors as long as you have a great story to tell the film will work.

I have to disagree. I enjoyed T3, and thought it was a pretty good movie, considering it was the third in the series.

There is a class of movies so bad that they're funny. Waterworld is one. In the theater, people laughed out loud when they shipped the oars and stuck them out the sides of the oil tanker. There's lots of shots that should have been edited out of that movie - like the wired up tomato plant. Ghosts of Mars is another. It's supposed to be a horror movie, but I laughed all the way through it. The subject matter was certainly scary, but the way in which they shot the scenes was just ridiculous. It's hard to keep a straight face when a sawblade is thrown through the air and chops off somebody's head - and the shot is of the head popping off the neck and flying through the air - rather like a golfer getting the ball on the green. Dracula is a great example of how to make an expensive movie look really cheesy. It felt like a cross between a soap opera and a 1970's sexy vampire flick.

You mentioning tomato plant reminded me of another 'so bad it was good' film - Attack of the killer tomatos ! Now thats funny

I think the thing I have with T3 is it was another 'could of been so much more' type film.

I thought that somebody might mention Waterworld. It was pretty bad, but at least it did have a small amount of plot, and even though it was very expensive to make, it DID make all that money back (eventually, and mostly because everybody wanted to see the film that squandered over 100 million dollars).

If you want to see a really bad Kevin Costner film, try watching 'The Postman' if you dare. I can't remember much about it, but the plot was sub-'Mad Max' apocalyptic twaddle. I can remember that the Bad Guys had some enormous artillery cannons which they used in battle, but I couldn't see any way they had to actually move the cannons from place to place.

As for 'Fair Game', a few seconds of Cindy Crawford's bits didn't make it worth watching over an hour of her pathetic attempts at acting.

But that's what the Fast-Forward (and Pause) buttons are for.

The Postman was pretty dire, I agree. But Waterworld wasn't all that objectionable to me. It's got a decent concept behind it which more or less carries it through the action set-pieces which, you have to admit, are fairly decently staged.

B

"Attack of the Killer Tomatoes" and it's sequel "Return of the Killer Tomatoes" (which includes an early performance from George Cloony) were intended to be bad. The first was a low budget parody and the second was a cash-in on the cult status of the first.

If you want bad films you have to mention the one-stop shop of awfulness: Ed Wood. We're talking about "Glen or Glenda" and the legendary "Plan 9 from Outer Space". If you haven't seen these movies you have no idea what bad is.

I'm afraid they have already been extensively mentioned and chiched as 'bad films that are so bad that they're good'.

B

"truly bad films are created when a group of experienced, highly-qualified professional film-financiers and film-makers waste millions of dollars on pointless vanity projects, star vehicles for non-actors or unnecessary sequels. "

According to this definition, Sweet Home Alabama makes the grade for me. I was so disappointed in Reese Witherspoon's choice to star in this ridiculous, sappy, so bad it didn't work romantic comedy. She usually makes such great script choices. What WAS that ending, for pete's sake!

Bloody contrived, is what is was (anticipating someone else's smart alec comment...)

Waterworld was dull in parts but I thought it was a good enough film. Orginal and watchable, its just that everybody has got it in for Kevin Costner since he does his own thing..

Joe Versus The Volcano has got to be the very worst film of all time. No story, terrible acting and cheesy to boot!