• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

Megathread What's the worst movie you've ever seen?

dragonix said:
Not sure. I couldn't stomach yuppy fever in this somehow adored American Psycho the first couple times.

My father is a stock fat cat so I must have bias.

That isn't fair nor accurate The Big Short is a celebrated movie with stellar performances so let me take a look in the mirror and get back to you.

Alright Hell Ride probably

Click to expand...

LovedThe Big Short even though every character is despicable ...oh except Christian Bale who's always despicably good
 
dragonix said:
Not sure. I couldn't stomach yuppy fever in this somehow adored American Psycho the first couple times.

My father is a stock fat cat so I must have bias.

That isn't fair nor accurate The Big Short is a celebrated movie with stellar performances so let me take a look in the mirror and get back to you.

Alright Hell Ride probably

Click to expand...

I was expecting the preview. I had forgotten that scene, how well-constructed it is, how it works on so many levels including the level of your personal finances. 10 million homes were lost in the meltdown, let's low-ball it and say that each one was where a single family of three lived. That's more than 10% of Americans rendered homeless.

Amazing a movie of mostly highly technical dialogue without a single special effects set piece can be so gripping. Even the joke with the quantitative analyst isn't a device for cheap laughs by a way to show something deeper. A counterpunch to these millionaire douchebags fretting about margins

Ryan Gosling is the hero of the movie if only because his ego is bigger than his greed

He works for Deutsche Bank, possibly the most corrupt. How corrupt is hard to tell since no country in the world is powerful enough to go up against it, quite the opposite it's actually considered Essential by the German government and the EU
 
Last edited:
Contenders for the worst films I've seen this year: The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard & Black Widow. I don't know how I managed to sit through either of them.

I think Widow was probably worse than Hitman, but neither of them have any value to me. I don't want to think about it too much. It's like examining different pieces of kangaroo shit to determine which emits the most pungent odour.

The worst film I've ever seen is tricky. Maybe Passion of the Christ.

dragonix said:
I couldn't stomach yuppy fever in this somehow adored American Psycho the first couple times.

My father is a stock fat cat so I must have bias.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if I'm reading you right, but American Psycho is not pro-yuppy / pro-fatcat. Bateman is a product of his disgusting soulless environment.

I love the movie and (to a lesser extent) the book.
 
The sheer amount of bad horror movies I've watched is astounding, I couldn't think of just one. But one I can think of off the top of my head is, The Hills Run Red
 
birdup said:
I'm not sure if I'm reading you right, but American Psycho is not pro-yuppy / pro-fatcat. Bateman is a product of his disgusting soulless environment.

I love the movie and (to a lesser extent) the book.
Click to expand...

I love it too! I was listening to the radio recently and "Hip to be Square" came on, and an image of Bateman covered in blood yelling "TRY GETTING A RESERVATION AT DORSIA NOW YOU FUCKING STUPID BASTARD!" popped into my head and I broke out laughing. It's one of those movies that works in so many ways, it's one of those ones that moves seamlessly from dark suspense to funny satirical comedy, and Christian Bale did an excellent job in his portrayal of Bateman I thought.

The only thing that I wasn't so enthused about was the ending...I had never read the book American Psycho, so I'm not sure if it's faithful to its source material or not, but the ending seemed ambiguous to me.
 
@Burnt Offerings

the ending seemed ambiguous to me.
Click to expand...

The ending is different in the book. The book is also way more graphic. There is no way it ever would have made it past the censors if they adapted it faithfully.

I like the ending they went with in the movie. The fact that it's ambiguous adds to it. Is Bateman killing these people? Does it really matter? He's a fucking monster either way. They all are. It's a disgusting world he lives in. Both interpretations work. It works if it's all his fantasy/psychosis and it works literally. Most cinematic attempts to pull this off feel really artificial. Bateman's descent into madness (complete with the killing and subsequent reappearance of Paul Allen) ties into both interpretations perfectly. Maybe people who occupy the upper corporate world in Psycho are so invisible and replaceable - and everyone is so wrapped up in their own shit - that people insist they are still alive when they're dead. Then again, maybe Paul Allen really is alive. It doesn't matter if he's alive, which is the point either way.

The book frequently features long (multiple page long) rants about Huey Lewis and other 80s pop stars.
 
14 years later, my original statement still stands. 13 Seconds is the worst movie I've ever tried to watch. I've subjected myself to some really shitty films in the interim, but nothing comes as close to 13 Seconds.
 
birdup said:
@Burnt Offerings



The ending is different in the book. The book is also way more graphic. There is no way it ever would have made it past the censors if they adapted it faithfully.

I like the ending they went with in the movie. The fact that it's ambiguous adds to it. Is Bateman killing these people? Does it really matter? He's a fucking monster either way. They all are. It's a disgusting world he lives in. Both interpretations work. It works if it's all his fantasy/psychosis and it works literally. Most cinematic attempts to pull this off feel really artificial. Bateman's descent into madness (complete with the killing and subsequent reappearance of Paul Allen) ties into both interpretations perfectly. Maybe people who occupy the upper corporate world in Psycho are so invisible and replaceable - and everyone is so wrapped up in their own shit - that people insist they are still alive when they're dead. Then again, maybe Paul Allen really is alive. It doesn't matter if he's alive, which is the point either way.

The book frequently features long (multiple page long) rants about Huey Lewis and other 80s pop stars.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Yeah I suppose so.

Interestingly enough, when I watch the film with others they often view the final scene, when Bateman is confessing his crime to the random yuppie (who then replies that that’s impossible cuz he just saw Paul Allen...which, like you mentioned, isn’t really proof of anything since it’s a running joke of the film how self-obsessed they all are & the chronic misremembering of names/faces etc.) as confirmation that it was all a fantasy...that plus the over-the-top shootout with the cops, the drawings in the notebook, etc.

When I first saw the film, I actually thought that it wasn’t particularly ambiguous and that it was all in Bateman’s imagination. But I read some things on the internet later that both Bret Easton Ellis and Mary Harron had come down on the side of, Bateman did the crimes "IRL" and that's what they were intending to come through in their respective depictions. That's what I remember them saying in interviews anyway. I can't really comment on the book like I said, but in Harron's film, it just seems like it's implied that most, if not all, of Bateman's homicidal ideations had been pure fantasy. If her intention was one thing and the audience came to an entirely different conclusion....she just seemed to take already subversive source material (the book, which has a reputation for being quite graphic), and then subverted it herself in a different way lol, so the ending has grown on me through subsequent viewings.
 
Part of what I like about the ambiguity about Paul Allen -- which, like you mentioned, isn’t really proof of anything since it’s a running joke of the film how self-obsessed they all are & the chronic misremembering of names/faces etc-- is: it works both ways, at the same time (for me).

It is both a film in which he did these things and a film in which he did not.

The book isn't ambiguous. I don't put much weight in what artists think about their art. Sometimes they accidentally create something that absolutely works despite not being their original vision.

If you listen to Kelly's explanation of Donny Darko (and Southland tales, for that matter, if you have gone there) it detracts massively from the appeal of Darko.... not so much Southland.

I think I'm alone in wanting Richard Kelly to produce (at least) ten more films.

The over the top shootout scene works on many levels, for me, and (again) compliments both interpretations. Bateman looks at his gun in disbelief when he blows up that cop car. He starts wondering if he is imagining everything. That doesn't mean he is. Maybe he's just fucking crazy.

The artists intentions aside, I think it's a brilliant film that accomplishes something that is notoriously difficult: it carefully and methodically feeds the idea that things are not what they seem, without descending into typical boring (and uninspired) Hollywood tropes.

My belief is, watching the film, that he did do it. His madness is a reflection of the mad soulless world that he lives in. It is unbelievable, even to a sociopathic serial killer, that people care as little as they do. That's what made him crazy. Being born into that world.

When Patrick breaks down and describes himself as a sick man, his confession means nothing. He lives in a world of sick men.

Art is open to interpretation.

My oldest brother insists there are no hints in Blade Runner that Deckard might be a replicant.
 
Last edited:
Getting off topic.

Anyone seen The Rules of Attraction (about Patrick Bateman's little brother)? There is a scene that (possibly) overlaps with American Psycho.

Anyone seen Southland Tales (follow up film from now-blacklisted Donnie Darko director.) I like Southland Tales. It is an imperfect beast, but it's definitely worth a watch... particularly if you are prone to psychedelics.

Back on topic (sort of): Southland Tales is cited by many people as the worst film they've ever seen. It stars: Justin Timberlake, John Lovitz, Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, Christopher Lambert. Seann William Scott & Sarah Michelle Gellar.

It is like Plan 9 From Outer Space with a bit more talent, a lot more money and a boatload of LSD.
 
Last edited:
ego_loss said:
14 years later, my original statement still stands. 13 Seconds is the worst movie I've ever tried to watch. I've subjected myself to some really shitty films in the interim, but nothing comes as close to 13 Seconds.
Click to expand...
Thats so awesome. Always cool seeing other OG bluelighters still active!
 
andyturbo said:
Babe Pig in the City.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but them's fighting words. I unironically love that movie. It's like a Roald Dahl story adapted by Terry Gilliam, but written and directed by the guy who did The Roadwarrior and Mad Max.

Check out Eberts review. As usual, he was dead on the money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top