10. Fool's Gold-To quote Richard Roeper, "They could have called this one H
ow to Lose My Interest in 10 Minutes." Yes, Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey reunited to make this inept treasure hunting movie after their inexplicably popular How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days. And yes, my interest was lost in about 10 minutes. This is a film that exists solely for the purpose of making money. I know what you're thinking, "But Josh, the purpose of any movie is to make money! Lol!" True, but at least other films hide it or at least provide us with a bit of quality. Fool's Gold did nothing but ride the coattails of How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days and failed misearably. Considering how stupid that aforementioned movie is, it's quite surprising to see that this one managed to be worse, even if only slightly so. The plot takes so many ridiculous twists and turns that it just screams contrivance and the characters are annoying to the point of insanity. But the real shame here is that talent is present. Kate Hudson can be adorable and has been in some well received movies, like Almost Famous. Donald Sutherland is an Emmy award winner, but is relegated down to idiot father. And Matthew McConaughey...well, he has some chiseled abs. Good for him. To be fair, a few other films, like Star Wars: The Clone Wars and 27 Dresses, were about as bad as this one and could have had this spot instead, but Fool's Gold managed to be just intolerable enough to edge them out.
ow to Lose My Interest in 10 Minutes." Yes, Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey reunited to make this inept treasure hunting movie after their inexplicably popular How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days. And yes, my interest was lost in about 10 minutes. This is a film that exists solely for the purpose of making money. I know what you're thinking, "But Josh, the purpose of any movie is to make money! Lol!" True, but at least other films hide it or at least provide us with a bit of quality. Fool's Gold did nothing but ride the coattails of How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days and failed misearably. Considering how stupid that aforementioned movie is, it's quite surprising to see that this one managed to be worse, even if only slightly so. The plot takes so many ridiculous twists and turns that it just screams contrivance and the characters are annoying to the point of insanity. But the real shame here is that talent is present. Kate Hudson can be adorable and has been in some well received movies, like Almost Famous. Donald Sutherland is an Emmy award winner, but is relegated down to idiot father. And Matthew McConaughey...well, he has some chiseled abs. Good for him. To be fair, a few other films, like Star Wars: The Clone Wars and 27 Dresses, were about as bad as this one and could have had this spot instead, but Fool's Gold managed to be just intolerable enough to edge them out.9. Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed-I saw a film this year that was incredibly 
powerful and sported one of the smartest and most well thought out arguments I've ever seen in a documentary. This is not that film. Expelled is a documentary featuring Ben Stein that explores why creationism isn't considered a relevant or plausible scientific explanation of how the world is today through flimsy arguments and a lack of statistical data. Now, I'm a science person myself (despite some of my religious beliefs) and I accept the theory of evolution, but that isn't why this film is so freaking terrible. What the movie does is create a condescending, ignorant view of those who don't accept creationism. It also fails to support its own beliefs. Stein interviews a scientist who has rejected the theory of evolution because some parts just don't "add up," but then the film never delves into what parts of it don't add up. It throws out an opinion, but doesn't ever bother supporting it. If studies can be done on creationism, then I agree that it should have an appropriate place in scientific study. The problem is that science is a tool for learning how things work and came in to being. It isn't based around religion. It is based around numbers and facts. The only argument for creationism is, "Well, it's my faith." That's not an argument. The failure to acknowledge this makes Expelled one of the most worthless documentaries I've ever seen.
powerful and sported one of the smartest and most well thought out arguments I've ever seen in a documentary. This is not that film. Expelled is a documentary featuring Ben Stein that explores why creationism isn't considered a relevant or plausible scientific explanation of how the world is today through flimsy arguments and a lack of statistical data. Now, I'm a science person myself (despite some of my religious beliefs) and I accept the theory of evolution, but that isn't why this film is so freaking terrible. What the movie does is create a condescending, ignorant view of those who don't accept creationism. It also fails to support its own beliefs. Stein interviews a scientist who has rejected the theory of evolution because some parts just don't "add up," but then the film never delves into what parts of it don't add up. It throws out an opinion, but doesn't ever bother supporting it. If studies can be done on creationism, then I agree that it should have an appropriate place in scientific study. The problem is that science is a tool for learning how things work and came in to being. It isn't based around religion. It is based around numbers and facts. The only argument for creationism is, "Well, it's my faith." That's not an argument. The failure to acknowledge this makes Expelled one of the most worthless documentaries I've ever seen.8. Space Chimps-The same studio who brought us the poorly made Shrek rip-off,
Happily N'ever After and the painfully drab Valiant now brings us one of the ugliest CGI movies to ever grace the screen and the worst children's film of the year. While the animation was fine on the actual chimps, everything else was horrendous. I've never seen an uglier alien planet. I've seen three year olds draw a more detailed landscape than the environments in this movie. But that's not the worst of it. The fundamental problem with Space Chimps is that it is totally lacking in imagination. I've never seen such a lack of originality in anything marketed towards children. Here's the best example of the creativity behind this catastrophe. When the chimps land on an alien planet, they meet a nice little creature who warns them of the path they must venture through. It's called the Valley of Very Bad Things. Seriously. I put more creativity into wiping my ass. This lack of creativity also coincides with the jokes, which are filled with an overabundance of monkey jokes, including phrases such as "chimp-rovise," "chimp off the 'ol block," and a radio station playing the hit song, "The Monkey-rena." The excessive amount of chimp jokes were so grating that they drove me bananas. Ba-zing!
Happily N'ever After and the painfully drab Valiant now brings us one of the ugliest CGI movies to ever grace the screen and the worst children's film of the year. While the animation was fine on the actual chimps, everything else was horrendous. I've never seen an uglier alien planet. I've seen three year olds draw a more detailed landscape than the environments in this movie. But that's not the worst of it. The fundamental problem with Space Chimps is that it is totally lacking in imagination. I've never seen such a lack of originality in anything marketed towards children. Here's the best example of the creativity behind this catastrophe. When the chimps land on an alien planet, they meet a nice little creature who warns them of the path they must venture through. It's called the Valley of Very Bad Things. Seriously. I put more creativity into wiping my ass. This lack of creativity also coincides with the jokes, which are filled with an overabundance of monkey jokes, including phrases such as "chimp-rovise," "chimp off the 'ol block," and a radio station playing the hit song, "The Monkey-rena." The excessive amount of chimp jokes were so grating that they drove me bananas. Ba-zing!7. The Haunting of Molly Hartley-In my review, I called this film "one of the m
ost inept and idiotic scary movies I've seen since An American Haunting." Surprisingly enough, I found an even worse horror picture that will appear later on this list, but that doesn't change the fact that The Haunting of Molly Hartley is largely unwatchable and a complete disaster from start to finish. Between poorly written dialogue, an inane and ludicrous twist, and its shameless rip-0ff of the CW's Reaper, Molly Hartley was practically dead on arrival. This film feels like it should be playing at the teenybopper time slot on television between idiotic teen shows like Gossip Girl and One Tree Hill because it includes all of the ridiculous drama you would expect from those programs including an "Oh, no she di-in't" catfight. When I saw this movie, there were only three other people in the theater: an old lady, an overweight man, and a thin, sickly fellow. The absence of any and all teenagers actually made me feel optimistic knowing that even their fragile little minds weren't falling prey to the idiocy I was seeing before me. The film is incredibly unscary, resorting to "Boo!" tactics constantly (like a flock of birds loudly flying across the screen, a hand coming out of nowhere with a loud musical cue, etc.), almost to the point where you start to sense that the filmmakers knew it was terrible, so they threw in as many of these cheap jump moments as they could in the hopes of tricking the audience into thinking they were watching something scary. Well, guess what? They failed. Better luck next time.
ost inept and idiotic scary movies I've seen since An American Haunting." Surprisingly enough, I found an even worse horror picture that will appear later on this list, but that doesn't change the fact that The Haunting of Molly Hartley is largely unwatchable and a complete disaster from start to finish. Between poorly written dialogue, an inane and ludicrous twist, and its shameless rip-0ff of the CW's Reaper, Molly Hartley was practically dead on arrival. This film feels like it should be playing at the teenybopper time slot on television between idiotic teen shows like Gossip Girl and One Tree Hill because it includes all of the ridiculous drama you would expect from those programs including an "Oh, no she di-in't" catfight. When I saw this movie, there were only three other people in the theater: an old lady, an overweight man, and a thin, sickly fellow. The absence of any and all teenagers actually made me feel optimistic knowing that even their fragile little minds weren't falling prey to the idiocy I was seeing before me. The film is incredibly unscary, resorting to "Boo!" tactics constantly (like a flock of birds loudly flying across the screen, a hand coming out of nowhere with a loud musical cue, etc.), almost to the point where you start to sense that the filmmakers knew it was terrible, so they threw in as many of these cheap jump moments as they could in the hopes of tricking the audience into thinking they were watching something scary. Well, guess what? They failed. Better luck next time.6. What Happens In Vegas-Romantic comedies are one of the most despised g
enres of film for many movie critics due to its contrivances and predictability. Unfortunately, What Happens In Vegas could be the most clichéd, contrived, and predictable romantic comedy to come around in quite some time. Its repugnance is nearly unbearable. In the film, Ashton Kutcher and Cameron Diaz are both facing hard times. Kutcher has been fired by his father and Diaz was dumped at a party in front of all of her friends. So what do you do when life gets you down and you want to get a fresh start? Why, go to Vegas of course! Yeah, except you do the complete opposite. Before this movie even began, it was already a complete mess due to its irrational logic. I can see why Diaz would go, but Kutcher? Buddy, you don't have a job. You can't afford to go to Vegas and blow your money away. But I digress. Although the two both live in New York, they have never met each other, but somehow meet up in Vegas (right). They get drunk, get married, and then win a three million dollar jackpot. Any two rational human beings would have a good laugh at how stupid they were to get hitched, split the money, and say their farewells. But for the convenience of the screenplay, these two decide to go to court over it where they are sentenced to "six months, hard marriage." Please. No judge anywhere would ever dole out such a ridiculous sentence. So what follows is an hour and a half of mean spirited pranks pulled on each other in the hopes that the other person will crack. The two are so cruel to each other that it's impossible to root for them because they don't care about anybody other than themselves. Tack onto this the predictable ending (hmm, I wonder if they get together) and the juvenile humor (one guy's name is Richard Banger--get it?) and you have one of the poorest outings of the year.
enres of film for many movie critics due to its contrivances and predictability. Unfortunately, What Happens In Vegas could be the most clichéd, contrived, and predictable romantic comedy to come around in quite some time. Its repugnance is nearly unbearable. In the film, Ashton Kutcher and Cameron Diaz are both facing hard times. Kutcher has been fired by his father and Diaz was dumped at a party in front of all of her friends. So what do you do when life gets you down and you want to get a fresh start? Why, go to Vegas of course! Yeah, except you do the complete opposite. Before this movie even began, it was already a complete mess due to its irrational logic. I can see why Diaz would go, but Kutcher? Buddy, you don't have a job. You can't afford to go to Vegas and blow your money away. But I digress. Although the two both live in New York, they have never met each other, but somehow meet up in Vegas (right). They get drunk, get married, and then win a three million dollar jackpot. Any two rational human beings would have a good laugh at how stupid they were to get hitched, split the money, and say their farewells. But for the convenience of the screenplay, these two decide to go to court over it where they are sentenced to "six months, hard marriage." Please. No judge anywhere would ever dole out such a ridiculous sentence. So what follows is an hour and a half of mean spirited pranks pulled on each other in the hopes that the other person will crack. The two are so cruel to each other that it's impossible to root for them because they don't care about anybody other than themselves. Tack onto this the predictable ending (hmm, I wonder if they get together) and the juvenile humor (one guy's name is Richard Banger--get it?) and you have one of the poorest outings of the year.5. One Missed Call-One Missed Call is the perfect example of why we need to stop
remaking foreign horror movies. There hasn’t been one Americanized remake of a foreign horror flick that I found good or scary in even the most basic sense, and yes, that includes The Ring. But this may be the worst of them all. The basic premise of the film is that you get a message from yourself hearing how you are going to die. After you do, it calls somebody in your contact list and makes them the next victim. Sounds interesting, right? Hardly. This is the type of movie where nobody even thinks about erasing all of their contacts. This is the type of movie where the characters don’t get rid of their cell phones until it’s too late. This is the type of movie where the two main protagonists say they are going to split up, then walk outside and get in the car together. Even the lighting changes from shot to shot in certain scenes. The whole movie is a complete mess and the sole purpose of every single incident in the film was to produce a cheap scare. The main character even crawls through a ventilation shaft for God’s sake. Why? No real reason. She just does. It was a poor year for horror, but none topped the awfulness of One Missed Call.
remaking foreign horror movies. There hasn’t been one Americanized remake of a foreign horror flick that I found good or scary in even the most basic sense, and yes, that includes The Ring. But this may be the worst of them all. The basic premise of the film is that you get a message from yourself hearing how you are going to die. After you do, it calls somebody in your contact list and makes them the next victim. Sounds interesting, right? Hardly. This is the type of movie where nobody even thinks about erasing all of their contacts. This is the type of movie where the characters don’t get rid of their cell phones until it’s too late. This is the type of movie where the two main protagonists say they are going to split up, then walk outside and get in the car together. Even the lighting changes from shot to shot in certain scenes. The whole movie is a complete mess and the sole purpose of every single incident in the film was to produce a cheap scare. The main character even crawls through a ventilation shaft for God’s sake. Why? No real reason. She just does. It was a poor year for horror, but none topped the awfulness of One Missed Call.4. Witless Protection-In one way or another, all of the movies on this list are off
ensive, but that's mostly because they're offensively bad. Witless Protection is just straight up offensive. I've never seen such an intolerant, racist, conservative film in my entire life. I kid you not, this picture makes racist cracks at African Americans, mocks the Muslim religion, and randomly makes fun of liberals unprovoked. This movie stars Larry the Cable Guy as an idiot sheriff of a small town who thinks a beautiful woman is being kidnapped by men in black suits. Of course, they are merely FBI agents protecting her. Larry, unaware of this, snatches her up and takes her away from her "kidnappers." So basically, Larry the Cable Guy was playing a dimwitted, redneck womanizer. That must have been difficult. Outside of its immoral and nauseating portrayal of anybody who isn't a white Christian conservative, the film is loaded to the brim with fart jokes and poor acting. The fact that there are people out there who actually find this obnoxious redneck humor funny really makes me fear for our society. Witless Protection is an assault on the fundamentals of this nation. Although there are three more movies that I placed above this one on this list, Witless Protection is the only one that is morally detestable and should be avoided by any reasonable, tolerant American.
ensive, but that's mostly because they're offensively bad. Witless Protection is just straight up offensive. I've never seen such an intolerant, racist, conservative film in my entire life. I kid you not, this picture makes racist cracks at African Americans, mocks the Muslim religion, and randomly makes fun of liberals unprovoked. This movie stars Larry the Cable Guy as an idiot sheriff of a small town who thinks a beautiful woman is being kidnapped by men in black suits. Of course, they are merely FBI agents protecting her. Larry, unaware of this, snatches her up and takes her away from her "kidnappers." So basically, Larry the Cable Guy was playing a dimwitted, redneck womanizer. That must have been difficult. Outside of its immoral and nauseating portrayal of anybody who isn't a white Christian conservative, the film is loaded to the brim with fart jokes and poor acting. The fact that there are people out there who actually find this obnoxious redneck humor funny really makes me fear for our society. Witless Protection is an assault on the fundamentals of this nation. Although there are three more movies that I placed above this one on this list, Witless Protection is the only one that is morally detestable and should be avoided by any reasonable, tolerant American.3. The Hottie & the Nottie-Where do I even begin with this one? Besides having on
e of the stupidest titles I've ever seen, The Hottie & the Nottie is utterly hopeless, a complete waste of celluloid from start to finish. It defies all things sacred with its heinous attempt at filmmaking. It's the pimple on the ass of Hollywood. Its horrific stench of awfulness still permeates through my brain. It deserves to make like the E.T. video game and get dumped into a landfill never to be heard from again. The Hottie & the Nottie is the film equivalent of a knife digging into my scalp and slicing out a piece of my brain because quite frankly, I felt stupider for having watched this. Everything is wrong with this debacle from the title to the acting to the directing. I could have directed this thing with more stylish flair than Tom Putnam did, the two leads have no chemistry, and I had more laughs in One Missed Call (totally true). Still, I like Joel David Moore. He was moderately amusing in Grandma’s Boy, he was hilarious in Hatchet, and he showed some surprising acting chops in Spiral, but he was intensely annoying in this film. What was he thinking? As for Paris Hilton, she has no comic timing, no skills as an actress, and no reason to be on-screen in anything that isn't in night vision. At least in House of Wax, her screen time was limited and we got to see a metal pole get thrown through her head. That's painful, but it's not as painful as watching her act. The Hottie & the Nottie is embarrassingly bad; an atrocity on a grand scale and everybody involved with this monstrosity should be ashamed of themselves.
e of the stupidest titles I've ever seen, The Hottie & the Nottie is utterly hopeless, a complete waste of celluloid from start to finish. It defies all things sacred with its heinous attempt at filmmaking. It's the pimple on the ass of Hollywood. Its horrific stench of awfulness still permeates through my brain. It deserves to make like the E.T. video game and get dumped into a landfill never to be heard from again. The Hottie & the Nottie is the film equivalent of a knife digging into my scalp and slicing out a piece of my brain because quite frankly, I felt stupider for having watched this. Everything is wrong with this debacle from the title to the acting to the directing. I could have directed this thing with more stylish flair than Tom Putnam did, the two leads have no chemistry, and I had more laughs in One Missed Call (totally true). Still, I like Joel David Moore. He was moderately amusing in Grandma’s Boy, he was hilarious in Hatchet, and he showed some surprising acting chops in Spiral, but he was intensely annoying in this film. What was he thinking? As for Paris Hilton, she has no comic timing, no skills as an actress, and no reason to be on-screen in anything that isn't in night vision. At least in House of Wax, her screen time was limited and we got to see a metal pole get thrown through her head. That's painful, but it's not as painful as watching her act. The Hottie & the Nottie is embarrassingly bad; an atrocity on a grand scale and everybody involved with this monstrosity should be ashamed of themselves.2. Disaster Movie-I was one of the unfortunate few to walk into the theater whe
n this horror was unleashed back in August and I wrote a scathing review pretty much blasting every facet of its existence. I even called it one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Considering that this is in the two spot, you can only imagine how appalling my number one pick is. Disaster Movie follows in the tradition of such classic spoof films as Airplane and The Naked Gun trilogy, only with lower production values, bland direction, awful acting, an incoherent story, and an absence of any and all laughs throughout its entire, painfully long hour and a half. While spoof movies aren't quite dead yet (the recent Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story has kept them breathing), they're slowly inching their way into oblivion thanks to Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer, the directors of this cinematic turd. I wonder what they must think knowing that they are single-handedly destroying the spoof genre. Anyway, I'd have to say that my biggest problem with this poop shoot of a film is the title. While a film like Scary Movie actually spoofed its inspiration, Disaster Movie doesn't. It spoofs films like Iron Man, Get Smart, No Country For Old Men, Enchanted, Juno, Indiana Jones, Beowulf, Wanted, Kung Fu Panda, High School Musical and more. So despite its implied title, it rarely spoofs actual disaster movies. It should have been called Any Movie to Come Out in the Last Two Years Movie. The only thing the title does right is sum up the quality of the overall product. Disaster Movie truly is a disaster of a movie.
n this horror was unleashed back in August and I wrote a scathing review pretty much blasting every facet of its existence. I even called it one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Considering that this is in the two spot, you can only imagine how appalling my number one pick is. Disaster Movie follows in the tradition of such classic spoof films as Airplane and The Naked Gun trilogy, only with lower production values, bland direction, awful acting, an incoherent story, and an absence of any and all laughs throughout its entire, painfully long hour and a half. While spoof movies aren't quite dead yet (the recent Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story has kept them breathing), they're slowly inching their way into oblivion thanks to Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer, the directors of this cinematic turd. I wonder what they must think knowing that they are single-handedly destroying the spoof genre. Anyway, I'd have to say that my biggest problem with this poop shoot of a film is the title. While a film like Scary Movie actually spoofed its inspiration, Disaster Movie doesn't. It spoofs films like Iron Man, Get Smart, No Country For Old Men, Enchanted, Juno, Indiana Jones, Beowulf, Wanted, Kung Fu Panda, High School Musical and more. So despite its implied title, it rarely spoofs actual disaster movies. It should have been called Any Movie to Come Out in the Last Two Years Movie. The only thing the title does right is sum up the quality of the overall product. Disaster Movie truly is a disaster of a movie.1. 10,000 B.C.-This film is a paradox. It made over $250 million worldwide, but
I don't know a single person who saw it, except for me of course. I have to assume that other people went to see it due to of word of mouth because God knows this movie practically had the words "waste of time" written on its trailer. Actually, its box office intake can be seen as a testament to how stupid our society is becoming. It amazes me that so many great movies can be released every year only to be ignored by the public while something like 10,000 B.C. makes a giant load of the green stuff. Everything is wrong with this picture (and I mean everything) no matter how you look at it. From a historical perspective, it's garbage. Although Egyptians play a large part in the movie, they actually didn't come into existence for another 5,000 years. Despite the dry, arid deserts that the characters traverse, it was actually much more precipitous. And then there are the obvious problems of how life was back then. I'm pretty sure they didn't speak perfect English, punctuating their sentences correctly and emphasizing the correct syllables. I'm also fairly certain that nobody in those days had perfectly plucked eyebrows, layers of make-up, or straight white teeth. There are even continuity problems from shot to shot. While the characters travel, they hike through snow, sand, and even a jungle. Seeing as how they're traveling on foot, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't reach these vastly different environments as quickly as they did in the movie. I mean, what were the filmmakers thinking? Did they really think they could just ignore such basic problems? The little bit of credibility this godawful movie could have had otherwise was completely wasted, although that still wouldn't redeem the picture. This film is so past the point of redemption that you could smother the Girls Next Door in baby oil and have them wrestle each other naked for a scene, and it still wouldn't be worth watching. 10,000 B.C. is the film equivalent to a horse with both of his front ankles broken. Just like the horse--its worthless, pitiful body lying there just waiting to be put out of its misery--10,000 B.C. is hopeless. The acting is wooden, the direction is weak, there are glaring continuity errors, and it rips off other, much better films (like Jurassic Park, for instance). I despise this movie. I hold it in a contempt that no other film has ever reached. 10,000 B.C. is the worst movie of 2008.
I don't know a single person who saw it, except for me of course. I have to assume that other people went to see it due to of word of mouth because God knows this movie practically had the words "waste of time" written on its trailer. Actually, its box office intake can be seen as a testament to how stupid our society is becoming. It amazes me that so many great movies can be released every year only to be ignored by the public while something like 10,000 B.C. makes a giant load of the green stuff. Everything is wrong with this picture (and I mean everything) no matter how you look at it. From a historical perspective, it's garbage. Although Egyptians play a large part in the movie, they actually didn't come into existence for another 5,000 years. Despite the dry, arid deserts that the characters traverse, it was actually much more precipitous. And then there are the obvious problems of how life was back then. I'm pretty sure they didn't speak perfect English, punctuating their sentences correctly and emphasizing the correct syllables. I'm also fairly certain that nobody in those days had perfectly plucked eyebrows, layers of make-up, or straight white teeth. There are even continuity problems from shot to shot. While the characters travel, they hike through snow, sand, and even a jungle. Seeing as how they're traveling on foot, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't reach these vastly different environments as quickly as they did in the movie. I mean, what were the filmmakers thinking? Did they really think they could just ignore such basic problems? The little bit of credibility this godawful movie could have had otherwise was completely wasted, although that still wouldn't redeem the picture. This film is so past the point of redemption that you could smother the Girls Next Door in baby oil and have them wrestle each other naked for a scene, and it still wouldn't be worth watching. 10,000 B.C. is the film equivalent to a horse with both of his front ankles broken. Just like the horse--its worthless, pitiful body lying there just waiting to be put out of its misery--10,000 B.C. is hopeless. The acting is wooden, the direction is weak, there are glaring continuity errors, and it rips off other, much better films (like Jurassic Park, for instance). I despise this movie. I hold it in a contempt that no other film has ever reached. 10,000 B.C. is the worst movie of 2008.
No comments:
Post a Comment