The Worse Movie You Have Ever Seen

Nick22 · **Reply #60 on:** December 15, 2004, 10:26:47 AM

Yes, the Grinch was funny. Jim Carrey did a good job mugging his way through that film. I have the soundtrack to the film.
Nick

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #61 on:** January 05, 2005, 11:40:37 PM

Yes, I thought it was pretty funny, too.

Let's get back on topic.

Nick22 · **Reply #62 on:** January 07, 2005, 03:36:26 PM

Very well. has anybody seen any bad movies lately? Not quite the worst films, but still very bad.
Nick

Malte279 · **Reply #63 on:** January 07, 2005, 05:23:35 PM

Some time ago there was a cinema movie about Jeanne of Arc which I found really very stupid, as it (almost bare of historical facts) it seemed to consist of esotericism mainly. I've seen a much better direct to TV movie about her.

Petrie · **Reply #64 on:** January 07, 2005, 09:57:45 PM

Last movie I watched that I didn't like was Elf (maybe I said that already) but I just sat there like a zombie watching it....nothing spectacular.

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #65 on:** January 08, 2005, 12:43:47 AM

"Garfield: The Movie", for starters. It doesn't do the original comic, or even the cartoon TV show any justice. It really wouldn't be that hard to ge a Garfield movie right. They did it all the time with animated features, bu they seriously messed up this new live-action feature. It just did no justice to the comic to the point where it was just ridiculous.

Problems with the movie:

1. John not geeky, whiney, or desperate enough.
2. Odie not stupid enough.
3. Nermal not annoying enough.
4. Who the heck was that big dog that chases Garfield? I don't remember any particular dog that did that in the comics.
5. Garfield not in control enough. Since did does John throw Garfield outside without suffering greatly moments later?
6. Garfield not mean enough. Come on! Leaving Odie out in the cold is nothing the real Garfield would be openly bothered about. Sure, he's do the right thing in the end, but he'd not get all teary like he was in the pound.
7. Garfield not intelligent enough. This cat could think circles around the villain they had for the movie. Heck, in comic format, the villain would have been more intelligent, himself, just to make sure that the real Garfield didn't think circles around him.
8. Garfield not cool enough. COME ON! When the real Garfield wants to be cool, there's no topping him!
9. The heck?! Garfield=afraid of dogs???? Um, since when?
10. No Irma.
11. The vet not mean enough. Since when was she EVER nice to John?
12. They should have put quotes right from the comics in there. The jokes and one-liners they made up just didn't do the trick.

Yes, the comic, for those of you who haven't read it yet, sounds cynical and everyone sounds weird or mean. Well, that's the point. A point that the movie missed totally.

Petrie · **Reply #66 on:** January 08, 2005, 09:05:53 AM

For anyone who's ever read a book and then discovered that a movie was made based on the book will soon discover you cannot compare the books to the films because they are not the same animal. If one tried to do an exact duplicate of a book for a film, we'd have ten hour films.

Same applies to comic books--they can't take and use everything that was used in the comic books or they'd have a plot that went all over the place trying to fit every little thing in that readers remember about the book. If one goes into a film based on a book hoping to see the book in pictures, prepare to be dissappointed.... -_-

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #67 on:** January 08, 2005, 04:43:13 PM

Arvens, its a movie based a comic strip. It would no thave been that hard to think up a script where the characters were much more true to what they are in the comic! The plots were never that deep, and the characters are 2D, at best, and its a comic strip. It would not be that hard to get a movie like that done right. And that fact is, they didn't.

The integrity of the characters should be considered first, and if they had been doing that, there would have been a lot less scenes in the film that would have contradicted everything Jim Davis did with the comic. Instead, in their place, would have been good scenes that kept the characters in check, so they still would have had a film of the same running time, just with the characters much moew true to what they actually supposed to be like.

Littlefoot1616 · **Reply #68 on:** January 08, 2005, 06:54:02 PM

I think the main word needing to be highlighted here is BASED! I've come to learn that when film people say something is BASED on a book/a game/a true story etc. do not expect an exact replica. It's just the ideas and concepts that are used and in most cases, not all of them are used. For me, my personal example of a movie based on something and I didn't like it was the first Resident Evil flick. It says BASED on the Capcom video game series which I love but I really didn't like he flim. There was too much inconsistancy and in some places, new things had been added that weren't in the games at all! For example, the main character Alice. Who's Alice?! There's no Alice in ANY Resi Evil games!

The Garfield movie (I personally liked) but I agree that some of the stuff didn't seem right. John definitely didn't seem geeky enough and Garfield (although beautifully animated) didn't truly reflect the Garfield from the comics or the cartoon! I think the word "based" is overlooked a bit too much and that's why people don't like film remakes of novels etc.

Petrie · **Reply #69 on:** January 08, 2005, 07:03:15 PM

I haven't seen Garfield, and never planned to see it. I've seen the animated series of a long time ago, and while that was good, it still cannot capture what you can find in the comic strip.

I always enjoyed the comic strip over the animated show, no matter how often I watched that tv series.

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #70 on:** January 08, 2005, 08:18:06 PM

You were the smart one then. I gave it a chance just out of the fact that "Scooby-Doo 2" satisfied me for the most part.

Hey, by the way, they have two whole volumes of the "Garfield" animated series out of on DVD. Thus far, they have 48 episodes. Its still very entertaining.

Anyway, another bad one I saw this year was "Angel's Revenge" (only good if you like looking at gorgeous women in scimpy outfits). Good for nothing else.

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #71 on:** March 20, 2005, 12:46:17 AM

Hey, let's get this thread going again! It was fun while it was active! Come on!

The most recent bad flick I've seen:

"Mortal Kombat".

JojotheIncredible · **Reply #72 on:** March 20, 2005, 08:05:57 AM

Easy, "Super Mario Bros. The Movie"

Reasons:

Mario and Luigi had Brooklyn accents.
Luigi was younger than Mario(they were supposed to be twins) and had no moustache.
Needed special boots to jump. (Mario is known for his high jumping)
Where is Princess Peach?
Bowser Koopa looked like a human. (Should be a Turtle/Dragon)
The Mushroom Kingdom was a joke.
Toad wasn't a Mushroom person.
Since when did Goombas have arms and legs?
Yoshi looks kind of like a raptor and Mario never got to ride him.
cliff-hanger ending with no sequel (thank goodness)
and MUCH MUCH MORE...

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #73 on:** March 20, 2005, 06:07:14 PM

Actually, the brooklyn accents are right. The Marios were originally from Brooklyn, until that was all changed in Mario 64.

Princess Daisy was the original name of Princess Peach.

Other than those two little details, you're completely right.

And, it was never said that they were twins until AFTER this movie was released. It was only said that they were brother. The film was released 1993, "Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island", was released in 1995.

Mirumoto_Kenjiro · **Reply #74 on:** March 21, 2005, 05:32:55 PM

Mortal Kombat wasn't too bad, especially when you compare it to its sequel. I have seen some bad sequels before and after, but MK: Annihalation was the worst I've seen. However, I love the soundtrack so I got that instead of the movie. When New Line Cinema tries to make movies based off of games, you know it won't be half as good as the games...

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #75 on:** March 21, 2005, 10:45:08 PM

Which is surprising, considering they'd be the first ones I'd go to for a "Legend of Zelda" movie. They may have a bad video game movie record, but they a good fantasy movie record. Which means it could either. Dou!

arrogantrex · **Reply #76 on:** January 25, 2008, 06:14:16 PM

A movie called Sid and Nancy. It was the story of Sid Vicious from the...Sex Pistols I think it was? I watched it because one of my friends thought it was phenomenal...and I wished that I'd spent my time banging my head against a wall for the two hours I spent watching that horrific film.

mcr mad · **Reply #77 on:** January 30, 2008, 05:21:14 PM

i have a few that are the worst i've ever seen

shrek 1 & 2 - f###### pointless and boring, it was'nt funny at all :mad
grease - a heller crap and gay musical

all of the scary movie's - thay were'nt funny at all just sick borring and childish <_<
south park the movie - worst than the show

most of the land before time sequal's - only one i liked were 2,3 and 4 the rest were ballock's

Serris · **Reply #78 on:** January 30, 2008, 05:28:54 PM

Birth of a Nation.

I had to watch that in an English class. This movie is THE absolute worst piece of **** I had ever seen. It was so overtly racist I felt like killing the director.

Oh, the movie is from 1916.

Ptyra · **Reply #79 on:** January 30, 2008, 05:52:34 PM

Quote from: WeirdRaptor,Mar 20 2005 on 04:07 PM

Princess Daisy was the original name of Princess Peach.

Actually, her name was originally "Princess Toadstool"

And Mario and Luigi are not twins; Mario is older than Luigi.