The Worst Movies In The History Of Cinema

The Worst Movies In The History Of Cinema

Movie-making isn’t an exact science. From the biggest blockbuster to the cheapest
“Z movie,” filmmakers all start out with a desire to entertain, but many times it doesn’t
go as planned. The pieces just fail to come together, and
we’re left with a product that is less than transcendent. However, there are also times when those dysfunctional
pieces come together perfectly, and a film project transcends badness to become something
truly, jaw-droppingly, spectacularly awful. Here are some of those films. Manos: The Hands of Fate Hal Warren was a Texas fertilizer salesman
who happened to make the acquaintance of Academy Award-winning screenwriter Stirling Silliphant
while working as an extra on a TV show. According to Entertainment Weekly, Warren
proclaimed to his friend that filmmaking was easy, and ended up betting that he could make
and star in a movie himself. He wrote the first treatment right there on
a cocktail napkin, and one of the most ill-conceived ideas in cinematic history, Manos: The Hands
of Fate, was born. The film that resulted from the friendly bet
has so many problems that it’d be easier to catalog what didn’t go wrong. Shot for $19,000, the Z-horror picture, in
which a vacationing family stumbles across a weird cult, features long, dialogue-free
shots of people driving, reaction shots that don’t appear to be reactions to anything,
dead-end subplots, shots that inexplicably linger on after characters have stopped talking… “There’s no place like that around here…” And overall, some of the most poorly-delivered,
atrociously written dialogue you will ever hear. “That’s ten miles…” “Ten miles? Might as well be ten thousand miles.” Its insanely shoddy production values have
become the stuff of legend, especially after the film’s notorious roasting on Mystery Science
Theater 3000. “Mike! Help us!” “You have to want to help yourself.” The film was lovingly restored by a fan in
2011, so its astonishing ineptitude can be revisited by generations of future filmmakers. Troll 2 The problems with Troll 2 begin with the fact
that it is not, in fact, a sequel to 1986’s Troll, and the villains are goblins, not trolls. According to Film School Rejects, the film
has become renowned for its incredibly clunky, heavy-handed, needlessly expository dialogue,
which was the result of its screenplay being written by a non-English speaker, Italian
writer/director Claudio Fragasso. “They’re eating her. And then they’re going to eat me.” Despite appeals from his amateur cast, Fragasso
insisted they deliver each line exactly as written, and their enthusiastic overacting
renders nearly every line of dialogue in Troll 2 borderline excruciating. “Oh my God what’s happening to her? And why can’t I move? There must be a logical reason for all of
this.” “Shut up!” The cinematography and special effects are
appropriately amateurish, the loopy plot fails to ever follow through on its occasional threat
to make sense, and its scenes of “horror” register as explicitly comical. “Oh my Godddd!” Actor Michael Stephenson went on to direct
the 2009 documentary Best Worst Movie, detailing his experience working on Troll 2, which contains
the depressing revelation that Fragasso, for all these years, was under the impression
that he’d made an awesome movie. “I did a very good movie. If the others say worst movie, them problem.” “Oh my gosh, that is the worst movie I’ve
ever seen.” MAC and Me The 1988 film MAC and Me was an attempt, about
five or six years too late, to cash in on the box-office-breaking success of Steven
Spielberg’s E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, but that’s not all it was. It was also an attempt to further cash in
by stuffing the film to the brim with arguably the most name-brand products ever before seen
on-screen. In the movie, a young, wheelchair-bound boy
befriends a horrifyingly ugly animatronic alien, and the pair awkwardly stumble through
a story that only pauses long enough to prominently feature corporate logos. MAC and Me is a film that can’t be bothered
to present a coherent plot, yet has no trouble grinding the proceedings to a halt for a full-on,
music video-style dance number set entirely inside of a McDonald’s restaurant, and the
friendly alien’s name was surely no coincidence. The dialogue is overwhelmingly cheesy, the
alien looks like it could have come from your neighborhood Halloween store, and the plot’s
lazy reworking of E.T. is inane even by the standards of cheaply produced ’80s kids’ movies. Howard the Duck It’s tough to remember when Marvel didn’t
utterly dominate the box office, but there was a time when Hollywood simply had no idea
how to handle their properties. For the strongest evidence of Tinseltown’s
comic cluelessness, look no further than the very first big-screen adaptation of a Marvel
property. To call 1986’s Howard the Duck a starring
vehicle for a C-list character would be generous. But producer George Lucas apparently felt
he could do no wrong in the mid-’80s, and he brought the full staff of his company Industrial
Light and Magic and a $30 million budget to the production, which would almost instantly
be pegged as one of the biggest flops of its decade. The film isn’t so much funny as it is deeply
weird, throwing Howard, who is mysteriously transported to Earth from his native Duckworld,
together with human love interest Beverly, played by Lea Thompson. It’s a strange pairing in the comics that’s
rendered downright disturbing in live-action. Its tone-deaf attempts at humor and creepy
animatronics utterly baffled audiences. “Howard, wait!…” “AAHH!” “Uh-huh, typical hairless ape.” The film struggled to make back half its budget
domestically. It showed the first big chinks in Lucas’ armor,
and tried its best to ruin a character who wouldn’t appear on film again for nearly 30
years. “You know, this is beginning to seriously
undermine my self-esteem.” Birdemic: Shock and Terror If you gathered together a group of random
people with absolutely no interest in film and forced them at gunpoint to make a horror
feature with almost no money and fewer resources, you would end up with with something that
would look a whole lot like 2008’s Birdemic: Shock and Terror. This complete ripoff of Alfred Hitchcock’s
The Birds tells the simple story of a happy couple… “Wow. Congratulations. I think you’ll look great in those lingerie.” …whose romance is interrupted by an unexplained
killer bird infestation. Its overall aesthetic, shot on the cheap,
stiffly acted, and incompetently plotted despite the story’s simplicity, would’ve been more
than enough to earn the film its place among the worst of the worst. But the birds themselves simply must be seen
to be believed, rendered with the absolute cheapest CGI anyone has ever seen, dropped
clumsily into the frame as our heroes swat at the squawking menaces. The repetitive, grating sound effects that
accompany their attacks just make the “terror” seem even more ridiculous. Some observers have gone so far as to wonder
whether Birdemic was actually intended to be funny. According to director James Nguyen, it wasn’t. “It’s shocking and terrifying, just like a
100 million dollar picture, Hollywood style.” “You think this looks like a 100 million dollar
picture?” “Well, I think from From a distance, you know?” “From a distance?” Movie 43 The cringeworthy Movie 43 is the result of
an unearthly amount of determination on the part of Peter Farrelly, once best-known as
the mastermind behind gross-out comedy classic There’s Something About Mary. Farrelly envisioned a new breed of sketch
comedy, a film that would play like a series of Funny or Die skits, but… grosser. According to The Guardian, Farrelly adopted
a strategy of waiting, sometimes for years, to shoot segments based on his stars’ availability,
and even moved the production 3,000 miles to accommodate Richard Gere. Through sheer patience, pestering and more
than a little guilt, he managed to enlist major Hollywood heavy hitters to completely
embarrass themselves in service of the most horrifyingly unfunny so-called comedy ever
produced. It’s been ripped to shreds by critics, but
it was famed critic Richard Roeper who hit the nail on the head when he said, “[Movie 43] is the Citizen Kane of awful.”

Only registered users can comment.

  1. Man, thanks for making me cringe so bad I had a stroke. I’m talking about the first one you guys took a look at.

  2. When I was a kid, i liked the Howard the duck movie, but I only ever saw it on TV and always thought it was an adult movie I wasn't supposed to be watching, which is why I didn't understand it, thinking that there was some adult theme in there that I didn't know about. Mac and me however, just gave me straight up nightmares.

  3. Mack and me when your 9 yrs old in the 80’s was Fukin awesome no Pixar ,it was meant for kids and teens why am I watching this

  4. Seriously not The Room? My Mom and sister liked Mac and Me (My sister doesn't like E.T. so she likes Mac better but less for that movie and more because she really hates E.T.)

  5. Gummo. Self-indulgent trash movie filled with unlikeable trash characters and utterly lacking in anything close to a coherent story or redeeming ending.

  6. That 2017 Dark Tower movie should be on here. Such a fucking insult to the source material and Stephen King’s magnum opus, which was brilliant.

  7. "The Room" !!!!!!!! HOW could you possibly forget "The Room"?? Or ANY of Neil Breen / Uwe Boll movies???? C'mon!

  8. 0:56 What DIDN'T go wrong with "Manos?' There's one part about 2/3s of the way thru, when the little girl appears in the dark with the dog from the painting. It is mildly, very MILDLY scary. That's it. The rest is a train wreck.

  9. Mac and Me was the shit when I was a kid. Now I can't watch it without cringing especially since Paul Rudd has made fun of it for all these years.

  10. Accents, geez….. It’s not Monos, it’s Man-os. Which is the Spanish word for ‘hands’.
    So the correct title is
    “Hands The Hands Of Fate”

  11. Now I strongly think that the 1986movie known as (MACK & ME) might have a much better chance at being great as a kids’s show series then as a movie, and to add it could maybe be broadcasted on the AMAZON Prime network.

  12. It is so easy to see how cheap the cgi on those birds in birdemic is, it made me laugh so freaking hard!

  13. A Dangerous Mind sucked beyond words, but also managed to be pretentious and painfully dull. Even the kinky sex was boring. And did I mention the over acting? Kiera Knightley's teeth marks are in every piece of scenery. Plus, it was depressing and exalted a deeply unethical relationship between a therapist and patient. It's the trifecta of arthouse awfulness.

  14. If i were a filmmaker, i would like to cast Alan Bagh (Birdemic's protagonist) as main character. I know how bad Birdemic was and that Bagh didn't acted any good, but with those awful special effects, bad script, bad sound, awful illumination, and 10 thousand-lower budget, even Denzel Washington or Meryl Streep would have sucked. I think Bagh needs to work in a high budget film, directed by a great director and prepare himself to do the role.

  15. You know what was Birdemic's main problem? The low budget. It was under $10.000. If they had a $300-million budget, it could've been a great film.

  16. Seeing this list made me appreciate the love and effort in Nigerian/Ghanaian movies … Yes, I'm specifically talking about 2016 1&2 …

  17. Aliens 3. A film so bad that is literally ignored as Canon! Others include Hammersmith is out starring Richard Burton, Superman 3, Arnold's Conan the Barbarian, Batman and Robin, alien from LA, Popeye, Holmes and Watson, Holmes and Watson, Holmes and Watson, Caprice starring Richard Harris, the nude bomb, X, Y and Zee,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *