What is your Top 5 Worst Movies?

[CouchCoach]

Ohhhhhhhhhhh, I hate me when I'm right. It's OK, you can too.

 

[RaZon]

we'll get along famously.
unless you have a private recording im not aware of....i've heard it all....cept for some concerts on bootlegg.
my Elvis music cd collection...just counting the titles....number over 500.
i have over 150 bootlegg concerts...from the early 50s...to the earliest known vegas show in '69...to his last concert in indianapolis in '77.

on vinyl i have every album he released...plus the camden releases.
the only record i dont have is his first christmas album...that had the booklet that promoted jailhouse rock.

i live by a simple rule....never pause a Elvis song til it quits....turn it up.

ELVIS.ROCKS.

and for the record....Elvis never made a bad movie...just some better than others.

We all have our thang, you are to Elvis like I am to them blues, own it all. Also a track, football history buff so I can relate with where you're at there. So we already share something, and that is cool my friend.

I love Elvis as I mentioned, his Sun Records recordings a prized possessions of mine.

As far as his movies go, once again we all have our thang,with the important thang being what you/me enjoy.

Love this....




.

 

[SlammedZero]

All of you bagging on The English Patient are making me think of the Seinfeld episode that is about just that!

 

[Creeper]

#5 Exorcist II: The Heretic

#4 Bloodrayne

#3 The Happening

Note: I stop watching M. Night Shyamalan movies with this R-rated debacle, made an exception two years later with his remake of The Last Airbender, cussed myself for doing so, and have not watched another one of his movies since.

#2 Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengenance

#1 The Kindred

All his movies could make this list, with the exception of The Sixth Sense, but even that was stupid once you realize what was going on.

 

[Creeper]

1. Orca The Killer Whale

2. The Happening

3. It 2

4. Corn
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/08/Corn_poster.jpg

5. The GodFather Part III

I could name 500 more if I had the time or inclination.

 

[Runwildboys]

Looking forward to talking Elvis with cowboyec, think we'll hit it right off, Might turn him onto some Elvis he hasn;t heard,

Hahahaha...............Hahahahahahahahahaha....................HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...............HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

Seems unlikely. He could probably tell you how many people attended Elvis's 3rd to last concert - How many were men and how many were women, and the average age group.

 

[Reverend Conehead]

Abrams' revamping of Star Trek is not appreciated by some but, retrospectively, how is the "shoot 'em up" in Star Trek (2009) that dissimilar to what was seen in Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan?

That Wrath of Khan explores themes about humanity such as getting older and dealing with loss, as well as themes of greed and revenge. It's consistent with the original Star Trek in that it explores themes like this related to humankind trying to better itself. It also keeps the characters consistent with the original series with Kirk being the gutsy captain trying to right wrongs, and Spock being the logical one, even using logic in the end to choose to sacrifice is own life to save others. The 2009 movie is pure trash compared to that. All it has is a bunch of shoot'em'up action and special effects and exactly zero characterization. Kirk and Spock are cardboard cutouts, comic book versions of their TV show selves, and even what little is shown is not not consistent with the original show. Spock, a Vulcan, only gets sexual once every 7 years for the Pahn Farr, but in the '09 film is shown fondling all over Uhura. If they had done any tiny smidgen of research about Trek, they would have known that was totally our of character for him. The Wrath of Khan was a smartly written Star Trek film in which the action conveys multiple themes about humanity, and ending with gut-wrenching emotion with Spock sacrificing himself. The '09 movie is just a bunch of superficial action with no quality story, no themes at all, trash characterization, and huge conflicts with the original show. In short, TWOK is like a high-end meal at one of New York City's finest restaurants, while '09 Trek is like cotton candy. The '09 film fails on every level. It's throw-away cinematic junkfood. It's so bad, many Trekkers (myself included) don't even consider it to be Star Trek. JJ Abrams even admitted he never even liked Star Trek, and it shows in the awful mess of a movie that he made. His followup movie was also terrible, and the third one (not directed by him) made some attempts at theme, but ultimately was still totally inferior to The Wrath of Khan and the original show.

 

[Runwildboys]

That Wrath of Khan explores themes about humanity such as getting older and dealing with loss, as well as themes of greed and revenge. It's consistent with the original Star Trek in that it explores themes like this related to humankind trying to better itself. It also keeps the characters consistent with the original series with Kirk being the gutsy captain trying to right wrongs, and Spock being the logical one, even using logic in the end to choose to sacrifice is own life to save others. The 2009 movie is pure trash compared to that. All it has is a bunch of shoot'em'up action and special effects and exactly zero characterization. Kirk and Spock are cardboard cutouts, comic book versions of their TV show selves, and even what little is shown is not not consistent with the original show. Spock, a Vulcan, only gets sexual once every 7 years for the Pahn Farr, but in the '09 film is shown fondling all over Uhura. If they had done any tiny smidgen of research about Trek, they would have known that was totally our of character for him. The Wrath of Khan was a smartly written Star Trek film in which the action conveys multiple themes about humanity, and ending with gut-wrenching emotion with Spock sacrificing himself. The '09 movie is just a bunch of superficial action with no quality story, no themes at all, trash characterization, and huge conflicts with the original show. In short, TWOK is like a high-end meal at one of New York City's finest restaurants, while '09 Trek is like cotton candy. The '09 film fails on every level. It's throw-away cinematic junkfood. It's so bad, many Trekkers (myself included) don't even consider it to be Star Trek. JJ Abrams even admitted he never even liked Star Trek, and it shows in the awful mess of a movie that he made. His followup movie was also terrible, and the third one (not directed by him) made some attempts at theme, but ultimately was still totally inferior to The Wrath of Khan and the original show.

You do realize it's an alternate timeline/reality, right?

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Really don't have a "top 5" list.

If it sucks I just shut it off.

Probably 100 horror flicks just in that genre that I've gotten through the first 15 minutes and thought, "Wow! This is a giant time-suck." And off it goes!

 

[Reverend Conehead]

You do realize it's an alternate timeline/reality, right?

Yes, they made the alternate reality timeline out of lazy writing. They only did that to cover up their rambling, garbage writing. Other alternate reality stories in Trek had reasons for doing those that were tied to their themes. Trek '09 has no theme. It's just a bunch of pointless action that adds up to nothing. Then they couldn't figure out how to make it work, so they just decided, "Oh, well, alternate timeline." I mean, it's plot is awful. If they wanted a comic book pseudo-science adventure show, they should have kept their hands off of Trek, as that's not what Trek was ever about before then.

 

[Runwildboys]

Yes, they made the alternate reality timeline out of lazy writing. They only did that to cover up their rambling, garbage writing. Other alternate reality stories in Trek had reasons for doing those that were tied to their themes. Trek '09 has no theme. It's just a bunch of pointless action that adds up to nothing. Then they couldn't figure out how to make it work, so they just decided, "Oh, well, alternate timeline." I mean, it's plot is awful. If they wanted a comic book pseudo-science adventure show, they should have kept their hands off of Trek, as that's not what Trek was ever about before then.

I'm pretty sure the timeline/alternate reality change was the point of the whole new series of movies, and not just a way to "fix" it. Personally, I like the new movies as much as the original ones.

 

[terra]

I'm pretty sure the timeline/alternate reality change was the point of the whole new series of movies, and not just a way to "fix" it. Personally, I like the new movies as much as the original ones.

You look at who wrote the original Wrath of Khan vs the abortion remake.

Frankly people who think the remakes are real trek are those prone to quick fixes and the easy way out.

 

[terra]

You do realize it's an alternate timeline/reality, right?

the whole alternative time line is lazy and stupid. fits right in with current Hollywood.

 

[Runwildboys]

the whole alternative time line is lazy and stupid. fits right in with current Hollywood.

So you'd prefer they just did the same old story over and over? Even if they wanted to, they couldn't use a new cast to portray just a younger version of the same characters. Nobody would buy that, because you can't duplicate what the original actors presented. The characters had to change.

 

[cowboyec]

Hahahaha...............Hahahahahahahahahaha....................HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...............HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

Seems unlikely. He could probably tell you how many people attended Elvis's 3rd to last concert - How many were men and how many were women, and the average age group.

des moines,iowa
11,000

 

[Reverend Conehead]

I'm pretty sure the timeline/alternate reality change was the point of the whole new series of movies, and not just a way to "fix" it. Personally, I like the new movies as much as the original ones.

That's fine. I'm just giving my opinion on them, but I'm not saying other people aren't allowed to enjoy them. I'm honest about what movies I think are good and which ones aren't, but I'm not some kind of emperor out to order people to yield to my views. There are some movies I've liked that other people have not liked at all. I loved the 2016 movie, Passengers, with Jennifer Lawrence and Christ Pratt. I was really surprised when it got bad reviews.

 

[Runwildboys]

That's fine. I'm just giving my opinion on them, but I'm not saying other people aren't allowed to enjoy them. I'm honest about what movies I think are good and which ones aren't, but I'm not some kind of emperor out to order people to yield to my views. There are some movies I've liked that other people have not liked at all. I loved the 2016 movie, Passengers, with Jennifer Lawrence and Christ Pratt. I was really surprised when it got bad reviews.

I liked it, but not to the point of wanting to see it again. I like some movies most people don't like too, such as Joe Vs. the Volcano. I thought that was hilarious.

 

[cowboyec]

I liked it, but not to the point of wanting to see it again. I like some movies most people don't like too, such as Joe Vs. the Volcano. I thought that was hilarious.

joe v volcano was good.
rhinestone was like that for me.
others hated it....i laughed til i cried on some scenes.

volunteers was another i liked that no one else did.

 

[Runwildboys]

joe v volcano was good.
rhinestone was like that for me.
others hated it....i laughed til i cried on some scenes.

volunteers was another i liked that no one else did.

Volunteers was hilarious! I quote the "money is money" line a lot.

 

[SlammedZero]

Ok I will add my list now. These are in no particular order for me, and I may have some that I cannot think of, but these are a few that just came to mind.

Jack and Jill: I usually am just fine or actually enjoy Adam Sandler's stupid slapstick comedy. I also will usually see a movie through, even if I don't like it, just to finish it. Not this one. This movie was absolutely stupid and I had to turn it off.

The Happening: What a stupid premise. I don't even care if I am going to spoil this for anybody reading that hasn't seen it yet, but, the plants start making people off themselves? Just ridiculous. To me they tried to film the movie in a mysterious or deep tone and it was just bad. Really surprised Mark Walberg signed up for that one.

Anchorman 1: I may ruffle some feathers on this one, as it seems to have a cult following, but I couldn't get into this one. I love the cast, but for me, it was just so stupid to me that I couldn't get into it, at all. Again, like Jack and Jill, I couldn't even finish this one even when trying to "check my brain out at the door".

The Master of Disguise: Where do I begin? Just................so dumb.

Blair Witch Project: Alright, I may get some static back on this one, but, I just never understood the hype. I remember when the movie came out. A couple co-workers were at work the next day raving about it at work going on and on about how scary and amazing it was. From there the hype built. I finally went to the theater and watched it. Now, while I will give it some credit for being original with it's "found footage" filming, it was just way overhyped and 'meh' for me.