Worst Movie in the History of Cinema
-
safaribacardi — 17 years ago(August 13, 2008 04:26 PM)
The Worst Movie in the History of Cinema? Hyperbole, yes, BUT - this has to be in the discussion. I didn't mind the 1st flick. I checked my brain at the door, and whatever, it was dumb and campy, but enough fun that I didn't ask for my money back.
Full Throttle, however, should replace waterboarding as the most effective interrogation technique the Department of Defense has. I wanted to sit back and enjoy a mindless romp like the first, but I just wasn't strong enough. It's a real turd. This movie is complete OVERKILL. No, I wasn't expectin' Citizen Kane, let's get that straight. I expected something like the first.. what I got was Charlie's Angels 1 on acid. Dumb is acceptable for these types of movies, but WE HAVE TO DRAW A LINE SOMEWHERE. Over-the-top is one thing, but there was no conflict, nothing interesting, barely any laughs, and not a damn thing could I tip my cap to besides the fact that the financier had deep pockets. I can forgive this trash because it knows it's campy, the 1st got by on that, but I can't forgive this trash because it doesn't seem to care it sucks. -
Monknificent — 17 years ago(October 14, 2008 11:41 AM)
Yep, pretty well put there
The only smart thing about this movie was its poster, and the only people who had fun in relation to this film were the three female protagonists.
The rest of us (well, those with IQs in treble digits, at least) were in turn: blinded and deafened by what was coming off the screen and from the speakers, then annoyed, then angry, then saddened, then depressed, then angry again. Then we wanted to strangle McG. Then we got tired and slept. Then we tried to forget all about this, for the sake of our blood pressure.
Sigh -
liutenantsalt — 17 years ago(January 25, 2009 10:33 AM)
This movie is complete fun. It's not some movie which requires you to use your brains - you can just sit back, munch on the popcorn or whatever, relax and enjoy. No brains needed. <<
So, in other words, it's complete crap.
A good way to judge how terrible a movie is based on how much the idiot "I only go to movies to be entertained by mindless crap and shiny effects and boobies" crowd defends it. -
Riotboy-1 — 17 years ago(March 29, 2009 11:31 AM)
As mentioned before this movie was awful. The only thing I liked in the movie was Drew Berrymore. 3/10.
Look at the night sky, where does it end?
http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=15368636 -
BadgerHayd4 — 17 years ago(March 30, 2009 12:00 PM)
Perhaps worst movie in the history of Cinema is a little much but not too far off. Sure there are movies like Home Alone 3, Son of the Mask, Date Movie, etc. that people have mentioned that are ridiculously bad as well but keep in mind the target audience for some of those movies people mentioned like HA3 & SotM are kids.
What makes this movie so bad, and it was on tv last night so i was reminded of this crappy movie, is how over the top it gets. Defenders have said it's just a fun movie but this movie takes away the fun with some of the over the top and unnecessary stuff in it.
Just to list a few of the ridiculous things this movie provides that only people with the IQ of an 6 year old would enjoy:
-When in the Warehouse fighting, the ridiculous, not physically possible stunts they do. At one point Cameron Diaz does a flying kick to 2 people, grabs their ankles with her hands, flips and lands perfectly. Now i know its a movie but at least make the stunts seem somewhat realistic. It's insulting to the audience that we're supposed to watch something so over the top and unrealistic and are supposed to be impressed by it.
-Continuing on the unrealistic moves, at the beginning Drew Barrymore pulls an impressive stand still into a limbo slide under a table as if she were on rollerskates.
-When in the motorcross race chasing after the bad guy in the red, you see him doing the jumps with the girls trailing behind jumping as well. However, everytime they were in the air they apparently felt the need to do heel kicks, supermans, and other stunt moves a rider would do in a stunt competition as if those moves were necessary to catch up with the bad guy. Its obvious they put the stuff in there because they thought it looked cool or trendy but in reality it looked pointless and dumb.
-when Bernie Mac smuggles the sculpture in which the girls are hiding in, they break through and are apparently naked and then go change in their clothes. Was it really necessary for them to be nude? Now don't get me wrong i'm a guy that enjoys naked women as much as the next guy but it was another example of putting something unnecessay in there to try and attract the viewer with no depth or taste.
-The Irish guy Seamus jumping off a giant boat and not feeling any effects. Now once again, i know its a movie, but once again its insulting to the audience. I can tolerate the walking through fire but jumping off a huge ship as if its just a 6 foot drop was once again over the top.
-at the beginning where the truck turns into a chopper and Lui & Barrymore somehow basically fly and were able to land on the wings.
-one of the most laughable stunts i've seen in any movie When Diaz & Lui confront Demi Moore at the observatory and Barrymore is standing behind Moore and tries to kick her only to get her leg caught. Demi Moore catches her leg, flips Drew over her head (with 1 arm mind you) and kicks her in the stomach. It is one of the worst looking stunts i've seen. It's one thing if your going to have her flip Barrymore over her at a somewhat realistic speed, she nearly pauses on the way down.
-and finally, Demi Moore's ability to fly off a building and land perfectly on her feet. Now in a movie like Batman, something like this is tolerable, although even in that movie you usually see when he lands its in a roll and not in perfect stride. In this movie it's just another example of insulting anyone with any intelligence.
Now those are just a few of the ridiculously over the top stuff in this move.
Once again i know it's supposed to be fun and not to be taken too seriously but theres a difference between making an action-comedy with some somewhat realistic stunts and making a action-comedy that is so over the top it no longer becomes fun. Usually in those type of movies you'll get some unrealistic situations but usually they aren't this bad.
Its just so stupid because you can basically see where the harnests and strings and everything is attached simply by the way they move.
Now other than We Are Marshall, McG has not been a part of any movies that were decent, maybe i'll give you the first Charlies Angels movie since although it was over the top it was still somewhat more realistic in the way they moved in the action scenes, so once you see his name at the beginning you know going into it your gonna get an over the top piece of crap. He really needs to just stick to music videos.
But even as someone who can enjoy watching really bad movies, this movie is hard to watch. And all i talked about here is just the bad action scenes, i'm not even going to go into the even worse dialouge.
So while its not the worst movie ever made in the history of cinema, it's def near the top. -
limesoda2 — 15 years ago(April 25, 2010 12:05 AM)
I agree with BadgerHayd4. I liked the movie but the stunts were overkill. I especially didn't like the scene where Dylan knew that the killer had a muscle tear and a scar on his left leg just by his footprint. Like come on, seriously? And no offense, but no woman so petite could do even a quarter of those stunts, or fly for that matter. Also the car crash, are they not even human???
"Wait! We can't stop here. This is bat country!"