The Worst Movie Ever?

hedonist said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

hm. I thought the Sixth Sense was fucking brilliant. I'm usually pretty good at predicting outcomes of movies, but that one, ZERO idea. ZERO. I guess, like PJ Soul, I wasn't expecting any kind of twist. I didn't know who shmalamadingdong was. I just heard it was a great movie. and it was. 

I thought I was the only one who calls M. Night that.

(sidenote - I was trying to think of one of his films which was a clunker; in looking through the list of his movies...he wrote the screenplay for Stuart Little?!)

Haha, I call him that too! It must just be the natural default, lol.

HesCalledDyer said:

Yep, Shyamalamadingdong it is.

Or just Shalamalah Do doo be-do-do
...to the Muppets song of course.

Car 54, Where are You?  (1994)

Even as a kid I was smart enough not to finish this movie. 

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJ_Soul said:

I think Tree of Life SUCKED. I absolutely hated it. A movie has never been so pointlessly pretentious, and few film characters have been as unlikable as that stupid asshole son of theirs. The only good part in the movie was when he died, lol.

However, I'm not sure most people here are taking the word "worst" seriously enough, lol. You don't get into the worst movie ever realm until you're talking about shit that is even worse than the likes of Sharknado or something. My vote is for either Left Behind: World at War (that's the third of the Left Behind Trilogy, those religious propaganda films starring Kirk Cameron... oddly, the first one was remade with Nicholas Cage recently, lol, That also sucked, but not as much), or for Cannibal Holocaust (1980), and that is solely because there is real life animal torture in it - they did not fake any of that. The animals were really mutilated and killed on film. So that alone makes it a very easy contender for worst movie ever IMO.

I've never seen that movie, but the first thought that jumped into my head after reading your post was, "How could the actors actually harm the animals when making the film?" If a director told me that I needed to grab a cat and do something to it... I'd say, "No way, man. Are you serious?"

Well I do not get the impression from that movie that a single "normal" person was involved in making it, lol, including the actors. The actors would have to be in pretty deep into weirdness already to get to that point in the filming process. Plus, it was back in the late 70s (came out in 1980). A lot of people didn't think the same way about random animals then like they do now. Not that I'm excusing them. They were obviously sick fucks to do that. I suppose they maybe thought it was justified for "the sake of their art" or some shit, I dunno.

That's a real water buffalo being ritualistically slaughtered in Apocalypse Now.

dankind said:

That's a real water buffalo being ritualistically slaughtered in Apocalypse Now.

You know, I'd totally forgotten about that scene, and I didn't know that was real... I don't know enough to form an opinion though. The animal wasn't mutilated and tortured, just slaughtered, presumably in a way that cattle are slaughtered in places. If that animal was going to be slaughtered anyhow, then I don't find that too out of hand. But if they killed it just to get that shot for the movie and didn't even use the meat or anything, then that would be disappointing to know about one of my favorite movies. It's sick to kill an animal just for the sake of a film. Still, I have some wiggle room if the movie is from a different era. It's the way it was done in Cannibal Holocaust that was horrendous. Really awful suffering for some of the animals (7 animals altogether, including a monkey), and barbaric. Some of the animals clearly suffered, and that was actually the point for the sake of the movie. A quick slaughter, well, how mad can I get at that, when I am a meat eater?? Not very. But again, it all depends on the circumstances surrounding that water buffalo's slaughter.

Edit: I had to go look this water buffalo thing up. Well... weird on Coppola's part I think, but it's hard to condemn it if the tribe was actually still carrying out their own rituals, even if someone did decide to facilitate the ritual for a film:

dankind said:

It adds absolutely nothing to the film, in my opinion, except perhaps some gory exhibitionism.

It was not as if they happened upon a ritualistic slaughter and started filming. Rather, they set it up so that they could film one. It was not the actual ritual; it was contrived for the sole purpose of that pretentious and pointless juxtaposition. 

Also, it was not swift or humane at all. They barbarically hack the water buffalo to pieces with machete-like blades and witness its immense suffering.

I guess it was more brutal than I was thinking. I've seen the movie at least a few times, but it's been years. I guess I still am less bothered because of the circumstances with both films... Cannibal Holocaust is just worse and much much more disturbing. But you're right, That's still messed up. I sincerely never considered that that was real for some reason, but in retrospect, I guess I should have realized, duh.

PJ_Soul said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJ_Soul said:

I think Tree of Life SUCKED. I absolutely hated it. A movie has never been so pointlessly pretentious, and few film characters have been as unlikable as that stupid asshole son of theirs. The only good part in the movie was when he died, lol.

However, I'm not sure most people here are taking the word "worst" seriously enough, lol. You don't get into the worst movie ever realm until you're talking about shit that is even worse than the likes of Sharknado or something. My vote is for either Left Behind: World at War (that's the third of the Left Behind Trilogy, those religious propaganda films starring Kirk Cameron... oddly, the first one was remade with Nicholas Cage recently, lol, That also sucked, but not as much), or for Cannibal Holocaust (1980), and that is solely because there is real life animal torture in it - they did not fake any of that. The animals were really mutilated and killed on film. So that alone makes it a very easy contender for worst movie ever IMO.

I've never seen that movie, but the first thought that jumped into my head after reading your post was, "How could the actors actually harm the animals when making the film?" If a director told me that I needed to grab a cat and do something to it... I'd say, "No way, man. Are you serious?"

Well I do not get the impression from that movie that a single "normal" person was involved in making it, lol, including the actors. The actors would have to be in pretty deep into weirdness already to get to that point in the filming process. Plus, it was back in the late 70s (came out in 1980). A lot of people didn't think the same way about random animals then like they do now. Not that I'm excusing them. They were obviously sick fucks to do that. I suppose they maybe thought it was justified for "the sake of their art" or some shit, I dunno.

My curiosity is aroused.

Edit: not to see monkeys tortured, but to see what this film is about as a sub cultural relic.