3 of the worst films you've sat through

[Darwock]

Most of the films mentioned in the thread I'd say were disappointments more than truly rubbish films. Real crappy films are the likes of:

1. Date Night
2. The Bling Ring
3. Twilight (any of them)

Bonus points for anyone who sat through "The Beautician and the Beast" too.

The clue is in the title. They have to be films you have seen...

[The Moleman]

Trying to force myself to watch the last hr of the avgn movie, my god it's terrible...

[noobish hat]

As terrible as the Ashens movie? That thing had like 200 cuts every minute.

[buster_broon]

Reading through this thread is pretty much movies I've enjoyed

[Neon Ignition]

Pikate hit the nail on the head, there's hundreds of thousands of worse films than these, a lot of these just had expectations they couldn't or could never meet. It's a shame in some cases as many of them do have their moments.

[Asura]

Vader is quite a bit machine and requires his machine parts to survive, my interpretation is the lightning ****s up his life support stuff, if this wasn't the case why dose he ask Luke to take his helmet off, surely if it was working he could of looked at luke then put his helmet back on.

Yeah, just wanted to mention this - the supporting materials do talk about this.

Vader can neither use nor withstand "force lightning". That's why he doesn't do it in the original movies or any of the games, though some of the EU stuff talks about him being able to do it before he "became" Darth Vader. It's also used to explain Vader's lightsaber combat style; his suit makes him quite slow, but extremely strong (verging on super-human). That's why he doesn't do the leaping about of Jedi in the previous movies.

Of course, this is all stuff made up to explain away inconsistencies between the movies.

[buster_broon]

Anything by the company asylum

Mega shark vs giant octopus, Atlantic rim etc etc

[EvilBoris]

Grown ups is the only one that springs to mind

Jack and Jill with Adam Sandler must be even worse as I couldn't actually sit through it.

[Guts]

Pikate hit the nail on the head, there's hundreds of thousands of worse films than these

The thing is, no one here has probably seen these same terrible chick-flicks as Pikate.

[EvilBoris]

The thing is, no one here has probably seen these same terrible chick-flicks as Pikate.

Well that's a new level of trolling for you Guts, sexist trolling.

[The Moleman]

As terrible as the Ashens movie? That thing had like 200 cuts every minute.

Worse...

[Asura]

Gonna be a bit controversial here, but one of mine was the recent Les Miserables, and probably for reasons people will think are weird.

I have no problem with movie adaptations, be they book-to-film or whatever. One way in which I differ from most people though is that I think an adaptation should get the most out of its new medium, instead of sticking slavishly to the source material. For example, film as a medium is both visual and moving, and things like fight scenes should be embellished to make the best of that.

The movie adaptation of Les Miserables disappointed me, because although the cast did a spectacular job, seeing people sing onscreen in a movie never matches the experience of seeing a musical at a theatre. There's just something immediate and ephemeral about a real-life performance that film cannot replicate. I just felt it had this "slavish" aspect in terms of trying to replicate the show, and that ceased to be interesting about 20 minutes in. The rest of the film I found a bit of a chore, with only one exception - the part where Eponine sings, which was jaw-dropping.

[Zaki]

Gonna be a bit controversial here, but one of mine was the recent Les Miserables, and probably for reasons people will think are weird.

I have no problem with movie adaptations, be they book-to-film or whatever. One way in which I differ from most people though is that I think an adaptation should get the most out of its new medium, instead of sticking slavishly to the source material. For example, film as a medium is both visual and moving, and things like fight scenes should be embellished to make the best of that.

The movie adaptation of Les Miserables disappointed me, because although the cast did a spectacular job, seeing people sing onscreen in a movie never matches the experience of seeing a musical at a theatre. There's just something immediate and ephemeral about a real-life performance that film cannot replicate. I just felt it had this "slavish" aspect in terms of trying to replicate the show, and that ceased to be interesting about 20 minutes in. The rest of the film I found a bit of a chore, with only one exception - the part where Eponine sings, which was jaw-dropping.

That and the fact its just close ups of the actor's faces. If you skip through the movie (random points) you will see a close up of someone's face. Try it.

I can't believe no one has mentioned 'The Spirit' yet! Frank Miller is not a good director! When you see his co-credit in Sin City, you know he's just sitting in a corner, wanking, while Rodriguez does all the 'work'.

[QualityChimp]

Your first mistake was watching a musical, you fop!

I'm only joking, I know what you're trying to say, really.
I've not seen the film, but I saw a clip and was so impressed I nearly did catch the whole film!
I'm still not sure who this Les Miserables guy is, but I wish he'd cheer up!

Although the live show will always leave more of an impact, I thought movie's version of this song was amazing and really did use the medium of film to make it a lot more eye-popping than the theatre ever could:
[hide][/hide]

There's a difference between thinking a film is really bad and just being disappointed for some reason. Either it didn't meet the hype that proceeded it or maybe it was a sequel with a lot to live up to.

I really didn't enjoy the second Bourne film, The Bourne Supremacy.
I'd read the book as it had come with the first film in a bundle, but I didn't actually enjoy it much and found it a slog to finish. However, I did like the idea of his wife, Marie, using the various skills and techniques that Jason had taught her to blend into the crowd after she escapes from her kidnappers. The story is split into two halves as we follow her attempts to evade recapture and his quest to find her.
In the film, they'd bumped her off in the first 10 minutes, making the first one pretty pointless and losing an on-screen chemistry that worked really well. After that, Bourne just becomes a monosyllabic terminator, grunting his way around the film.

To add insult to injury, one of the highlights of The Bourne Identity was the action scenes. So much so that it showed Bond where it was going wrong and the whole series got rebooted. In Identity, Jason fights with an assassin in his Parisian home armed only with a biro and an impressive display of Kali/Escrima. In Supremacy, he fights with a CIA agent armed only with a newspaper, but the scene is so badly shot, thanks to heinous abuse of Shakycam, we see him pick up a newspaper and then the agent's on the floor. Who knows what happened?!

The mini chase in Identity was brilliant, funny and exciting, but Supremacy's finale chase just seemed to have close-up shaky shots of Bourne's face, tunnel lights and changing gears. It's the first time I can remember getting a headache from watching a film because of the badly filmed action.

I was gutted when the Bond franchise hired Dan Bradley, based on his work on the two Bourne sequels. Lo and behold, Quantum of Solace became a jittery mess as we try to work out what's going on right from the start. Someone's in a car boot. Now they're falling off some scaffolding. Somebody is dead for some reason. His first film as the primary Director, the Red Dawn remake, might have got a bit more slack if he'd shot some exciting action sequences, but after the initial invasion sequence, he resorted to his usual style of undecipherable Shakycam.

[Asura]

In the film, they'd bumped her off in the first 10 minutes, making the first one pretty pointless and losing an on-screen chemistry that worked really well. After that, Bourne just becomes a monosyllabic terminator, grunting his way around the film.

This is something which always gets me with sequels. Consider Blade, for example. I hate it when characters are written out like that.