There is one film, that may not be "worst i have ever seen", but certainly is "worst i have ever seen in cinema"...and the film is called "Legion"

Written by Ellrohir on 17.07.2010 at 16:34

There is one film, that may not be "worst i have ever seen", but certainly is "worst i have ever seen in cinema"...and the film is called "Legion"

though i very rarely go to the cinema these days, in that category i myself would include "The Midnight Meat Train", which i saw on Halloween night 2 years ago... jesus H christ, the shit they show in the cinemas these days is appalling.

Written by [user id=4365] on 17.07.2010 at 16:17

Exactly, I could spend hours going through those films picking out what wouldn't work in real life. There's no sense of grey here, just black and white.

my thoughts exactly as to his reasoning... it's all black and white.

I've heard that Legion is pretty dire, which is annoying as it looked like it might have been a bit good. Someone I know who generally likes most films said it was rubbish, and when that happens I know to stay away from it.

Written by [user id=105293] on 17.07.2010 at 01:47

How am I supposed to pick just one film, when there's so many disasterous pieces of garbage out there? I'll just make a short list of truly awful films:

Kingdom of Heaven, Return of the Jedi, Gladiator, Batman and Robin, The Matrix Revolutions, The Phantom Menace, The Attack of the Clones, The Revenge of the Sith, Avatar, Minority Report, Lost in Space, Superman II - IV, Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the blah blah blah, Transformers, 2012, Godzilla, Home Alone II-IV, every single Uwe Boll movie, Bad Boys 2, Star Trek (2009), The Dark Knight, Harry Potter IV-VI (and most likely VII), The Day after tomorrow, X-men III, Alien resurrection, Alien, Advent Children, Hannibal, The Fall of the Roman Empire. Plus a certain Kubrick film, which I will not mention, because I do not wish to be murdered.

Jesus.....

Written by [user id=4365] on 17.07.2010 at 11:27

Ah I see, so in other words there's nothing wrong with the film at all, more your total inability to allow for any sort of suspension of disbelief. With your (wholly unnatural) methodology you could more or less write off every film ever made (except for the ones you choose not to), like I saw you do with the equally absurd and fastidious description of other texts, bent entirely around how you'd have liked them to conclude, not to mention your rather tenuous grasp of the term "plot hole" which doesn't cover the overactive imagination of individuals who confuse it with supposition based on the out of context world they create in their heads (remember, these are 2 hour or so films, not books). I won't enquire further into your weird and sorry to say, depressing, way of viewing film, especially as it's quite obvious how self-aware you are about doing it (and I suspect, how much you revel in the carefully constructed exclusivity), not to mention its total incongruity with your "favourite films" - it would be a pointless endeavor on my part to try and tackle such personal insight.

Of course, that's just my observation. Sorry to come across as harsh (and verbose), I just don't have much time for the illogical. And I don't think you understood this thread, you seem to have reserved it for decent films which disappointed you, not actual terrible, awful films which should have never made it to screen. To have Star Wars and Empire amongst your favourite and Return of the Jedi as one of the worst is just baffling to my eyes, surely a film as terrible as you seem to think would have null and voided the previous two. The vast majority managed to compensate for the vague disappointment of it and concentrate on the good parts (which were plenty), a skill I don't think you have, or indeed want as it doesn't coincide with your agenda. If your chosen taste was real-life drama, and not fantasy and sci-fi as it clearly is, it would have made a modicum of sense, so it, and frankly you, doesn't.

This is one of the most awesome posts I've seen in this forum yet.

Written by Kennoth on 17.07.2010 at 19:08

This is one of the most awesome posts I've seen in this forum yet.

Ehhhh! (makes the weird sound the Fonz makes)

Was a bit of a rant though. But cheers!

Quote:

Quote:

Ah I see, so in other words there's nothing wrong with the film at all, more your total inability to allow for any sort of suspension of disbelief. With your (wholly unnatural) methodology you could more or less write off every film ever made (except for the ones you choose not to), like I saw you do with the equally absurd and fastidious description of other texts, bent entirely around how you'd have liked them to conclude, not to mention your rather tenuous grasp of the term "plot hole" which doesn't cover the overactive imagination of individuals who confuse it with supposition based on the out of context world they create in their heads (remember, these are 2 hour or so films, not books). I won't enquire further into your weird and sorry to say, depressing, way of viewing film, especially as it's quite obvious how self-aware you are about doing it (and I suspect, how much you revel in the carefully constructed exclusivity), not to mention its total incongruity with your "favourite films" - it would be a pointless endeavor on my part to try and tackle such personal insight.

Of course, that's just my observation. Sorry to come across as harsh (and verbose), I just don't have much time for the illogical. And I don't think you understood this thread, you seem to have reserved it for decent films which disappointed you, not actual terrible, awful films which should have never made it to screen. To have Star Wars and Empire amongst your favourite and Return of the Jedi as one of the worst is just baffling to my eyes, surely a film as terrible as you seem to think would have null and voided the previous two. The vast majority managed to compensate for the vague disappointment of it and concentrate on the good parts (which were plenty), a skill I don't think you have, or indeed want as it doesn't coincide with your agenda. If your chosen taste was real-life drama, and not fantasy and sci-fi as it clearly is, it would have made a modicum of sense, so it, and frankly you, doesn't.

Suspension disbelief =/= turning a blind eye to plot contrivances. If I had accused the film of having aliens in the first place, then you would have had a point. As it is, you don't. The company wants the alien, the alien kills effectively are things the film tells us. Not my imagination, but established plot points. But these two things are completely contradicted by the way the company tries to aquire an alien and the way the alien is defeated. Points, which you attemp to jump over and ignore with your "you could say that about any film" rhetoric.

Why would ROTJ null and void the previous films??? You might just as well say that the prequels null and void the original trilogy (which they don't). You're confusing a hurt reputation with a hurt film.

ROTJ belongs amongst the worst films of all time. Here's a short list of its major problems:

Re-using the story of ANH
The Jabba scenes.
Luke's incompetence during the (unnecessary) rescue of Han Solo. "We'll save Han from imprisonment by giving Jabba more prisoners!"
The wasting of Vader's character, who spends the entire first hour waiting for the Emperor and Luke.
Obi-Wan's retarded excuse for not telling Luke the truth about Vader.
The meaningless reveal of Leia being Luke's sister.
Rebels not seeing through the trap (the second death star being built with and even greater security hole than the first one???)
Han Solo as the leader of ground troops, when he was only valuable as a pilot.
Lando as the leader of the attack, when he was supposed to have been a busyness man.
Luke and Han wasting time to rescue Leia, when the entire plan depend upon them blowing up the shield generator. They didn't even have any idea of her whereabouts or if she was even still alive. Risking the freedom of the galaxy to save your girlfriend. Really, George?
Cannibalistic teddy-bear "heroes".
Luke revealing that there are rebels on Endor by giving himself up to Vader, essentially sentencing all his friends to death to save one very bad man, who cut off his hand.
The idea that Luke would somehow "turn to the dark side" by killing the man, who's death is the desired result of the ENTIRE ATTACK.
Luke watching his friends die in battle as he does nothing.
Ewoks defeating storm troopers with sticks and stones.
Luke hiding behind a pole and Vader not finding him. "You can't hide forever!" what happened to force sencing?
The light saber duel between Luke and Vader. Luke looses his composurr, but wins the fight. Yeah, right.
Luke throwing away his weapon in front of an enemy, whom if he survives, will enslave the galaxy and kill all Luke's friends.
The teddy-bear picnic.
Han Solo sitting in the middle of the ending scene, as if he was the hero of the saga.

Over and out.

Jesus, you are anal, aren't you?
How can you enjoy anything in lifw with that sort of mindset?

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 17.07.2010 at 22:50

Jesus, you are anal, aren't you?
How can you enjoy anything in lifw with that sort of mindset?

Haha. exactly! ^_^ I've watched that film 30+ times and I've never even thought about any of those "issues"

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 17.07.2010 at 22:50

Jesus, you are anal, aren't you?
How can you enjoy anything in lifw with that sort of mindset?

Ditto. Never knew it was humanly possible to take movies THAT seriously.
It'd be really boring if everything we saw were office/house life dramas.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

That was the first thing that sprng to mind as well when reading his post.
But he has Lord Of The Rings amongst his favourite films. Weird since loads of things in that film aren't possible in real life.

Exactly, I could spend hours going through those films picking out what wouldn't work in real life. There's no sense of grey here, just black and white.

I have no problems with films being fantastical, only with them being nonsensical in their own world. For example: if the ring of power had been destroyed by Gimli's axe, then the problem would have been that the film would contradicted itself, not that it contradicted the rules of reality. In Alien the thing kills crew members very successfully, but in the end just let's Ripley win, contradicting both a) it's earlier behaviour and b) the idea that it would be useful as a "biological weapon".

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Written by [user id=105293] on 17.07.2010 at 23:08

That was the first thing that sprng to mind as well when reading his post.
But he has Lord Of The Rings amongst his favourite films. Weird since loads of things in that film aren't possible in real life.

Exactly, I could spend hours going through those films picking out what wouldn't work in real life. There's no sense of grey here, just black and white.

I have no problems with films being fantastical, only with them being nonsensical in their own world. For example: if the ring of power had been destroyed by Gimli's axe, then the problem would have been that the film would contradicted itself, not that it contradicted the rules of reality. In Alien the thing kills crew members very successfully, but in the end just let's Ripley win, contradicting both a) it's earlier behaviour and b) the idea that it would be useful as a "biological weapon".

By that logic, almost every slasher sucks, because there's always one survivor, most of the time. Seriously, what's so bothersome about that? Earlier behavior?

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I have no problems with films being fantastical, only with them being nonsensical in their own world. For example: if the ring of power had been destroyed by Gimli's axe, then the problem would have been that the film would contradicted itself, not that it contradicted the rules of reality. In Alien the thing kills crew members very successfully, but in the end just let's Ripley win, contradicting both a) it's earlier behaviour and b) the idea that it would be useful as a "biological weapon".

By that logic, almost every slasher sucks, because there's always one survivor, most of the time. Seriously, what's so bothersome about that? Earlier behavior?

Being formulatic makes a film predictable and looses some of the tension, but it doesn't necessarily make the film bad. I am not really at home when it comes to slashers movies, though. What bothers me about the ending of Alien, is that Ripley doesn't deserve to win, she wins because the plot needs her to. She doesn't defeat the alien, the alien sits still and let's her win. That is contrived, because the alien would have logically killed her right after she walked into the escape pod/thing/whatever.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 17.07.2010 at 22:50

How can you enjoy anything in lifw with that sort of mindset?

I can, because there are better filmmakers out there than Lucas and Ridley Scott. Look at Empire Strikes Back, a film that was NOT written or directed by Lucas: the ice battle on Hoth, the idea that a great warrior doesn't have to be physically great, but can be a green little weirdo, the clever dialogue between Han and Leia, the menacing presence of Darth Vader. It's all great stuff, created by greater storytellers than Lucas (Irvin Kershner, Lawrence Kasdan and Gary Kurtz). By the same standards that I consider ROTJ to be funking garbage, I consider TESB to be a wonderful film.

Written by [user id=105293] on 17.07.2010 at 23:49

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 17.07.2010 at 22:50

How can you enjoy anything in lifw with that sort of mindset?

I can, because there are better filmmakers out there than Lucas and Ridley Scott. Look at Empire Strikes Back, a film that was NOT written or directed by Lucas: the ice battle on Hoth, the idea that a great warrior doesn't have to be physically great, but can be a green little weirdo, the clever dialogue between Han and Leia, the menacing presence of Darth Vader. It's all great stuff, created by greater storytellers than Lucas (Irvin Kershner, Lawrence Kasdan and Gary Kurtz). By the same standards that I consider ROTJ to be funking garbage, I consider TESB to be a wonderful film.

Lucas wrote the story for The Empire Strikes Back

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I can, because there are better filmmakers out there than Lucas and Ridley Scott. Look at Empire Strikes Back, a film that was NOT written or directed by Lucas: the ice battle on Hoth, the idea that a great warrior doesn't have to be physically great, but can be a green little weirdo, the clever dialogue between Han and Leia, the menacing presence of Darth Vader. It's all great stuff, created by greater storytellers than Lucas (Irvin Kershner, Lawrence Kasdan and Gary Kurtz). By the same standards that I consider ROTJ to be funking garbage, I consider TESB to be a wonderful film.

Lucas wrote the story for The Empire Strikes Back

No, he did not. Even Lucas' original screenplay for the first film (which was basically going to be a space version of Kurosawa's Hidden fortress) was re-written by Francis Coppola (Lucas used to be his protectee), who stated that even after he helped Lucas with it, it was still an awful screenplay.
Lucas isn't a good director, but he is an abysmal writer (he even admits to it and doesn't at all care that we all know), who had greater writers do the job for him (as evidence by the prequel films, which he wrote all on his own). The only original idea Lucas contributed was Daddy Vader. I recommend reading The Secret History of Star Wars.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Written by [user id=105293] on 18.07.2010 at 00:31

I can, because there are better filmmakers out there than Lucas and Ridley Scott. Look at Empire Strikes Back, a film that was NOT written or directed by Lucas: the ice battle on Hoth, the idea that a great warrior doesn't have to be physically great, but can be a green little weirdo, the clever dialogue between Han and Leia, the menacing presence of Darth Vader. It's all great stuff, created by greater storytellers than Lucas (Irvin Kershner, Lawrence Kasdan and Gary Kurtz). By the same standards that I consider ROTJ to be funking garbage, I consider TESB to be a wonderful film.

Lucas wrote the story for The Empire Strikes Back

No, he did not.

Ye she did. Check up on your facts. He did however NOT write the screenplay. But the story is originally his.

120 Days of Sodom, boring as FUCK ...

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 18.07.2010 at 01:35

Written by [user id=105293] on 18.07.2010 at 00:31

I can, because there are better filmmakers out there than Lucas and Ridley Scott. Look at Empire Strikes Back, a film that was NOT written or directed by Lucas: the ice battle on Hoth, the idea that a great warrior doesn't have to be physically great, but can be a green little weirdo, the clever dialogue between Han and Leia, the menacing presence of Darth Vader. It's all great stuff, created by greater storytellers than Lucas (Irvin Kershner, Lawrence Kasdan and Gary Kurtz). By the same standards that I consider ROTJ to be funking garbage, I consider TESB to be a wonderful film.

Lucas wrote the story for The Empire Strikes Back

No, he did not.

Ye she did. Check up on your facts. He did however NOT write the screenplay. But the story is originally his.

He did write it, trust me I'v been a Star wars Fanatic 16 years. I'v seen every Documentary and read every article. Lucas wrote it!

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Lucas wrote the story for The Empire Strikes Back

No, he did not.

Ye she did. Check up on your facts. He did however NOT write the screenplay. But the story is originally his.

I am more than convinced, that it is not. Lucas took credit for other people's work. It becomes blatantly obvious, when you watch the prequel films, that he can't write to save his life. "I wish, that I could just wish away my feelings."

Isn't all that discussion supposed to be in the Star Wars thread.

I personally haven't seen it but T he Last Airbender sur is that dudes worst movie: http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/bt/aj/ajsreview/25242-the-last-airbender-angry-review

Well Lucas was entirely responsible for THX-1138 which shows he was indeed a decent writer AND director (at least co-operatively), at one point in his career, so there's no real mystery there: it was a great film (and an uber cult film)!

I will always wonder what Return of the Jedi would have been like under Lynch, as irrevelent as it is at this point.

It's no secret that Lucas lost his ability to write over the couple of decades but the overall story was clearly his own. The new films were just too politically based and had poor characterisation to be great but definitely had a Star Wars feel (even if it was mostly due to John Williams score. etc.) despite a lack of tangibilty with the props and scenery.

I think the ultimate fact here is that Star Wars in its entirety was Lucas' child, despite the writing. Without him would we have had, I dunno, Plan 9 From Outer Space?

Written by Zombie on 18.07.2010 at 02:20

120 Days of Sodom, boring as FUCK ...

Well what did you expect?

Written by [user id=4365] on 17.07.2010 at 17:26

I've heard that Legion is pretty dire, which is annoying as it looked like it might have been a bit good. Someone I know who generally likes most films said it was rubbish, and when that happens I know to stay away from it.

the biggest problem is, that the movie is totally empty and boring except a few minutes of angel fights (because those angels looks damn good to me)...plus the plot is stupid, character behavior is stupid, acting skills are poor...i was tricked by the trailer :?

Lol, I just remembered the biggest plot hole of all time. It involves Lord of the Rings and flying creatures. I think it's pretty obvious what I'm talking about. I bet a certain individual chose to ignore the plot contrivances of that one.

I simply refer you to this:
www.sean-crist.com/personal/pages/eagles/index.html

Looks like mister plot-hole will have to find a new favourite franchise. Ooh, I'm such a bitch!

Speaking of LOTR, I got very frustrated watching the third part, especially when that chick killed the supposedly-tough Witch King. A lot of the stuff were lame in the third part, but that one part irritated the hell out of me.

And not to mention how hobbits are successfully killing orcs.

Written by Kennoth on 18.07.2010 at 16:16

Speaking of LOTR, I got very frustrated watching the third part, especially when that chick killed the supposedly-tough Witch King. A lot of the stuff were lame in the third part, but that one part irritated the hell out of me.

And not to mention how hobbits are successfully killing orcs.

The ending of the film is one of the lamest most tearjerking scenes I have ever come across. PLus Sam gets gayer and gayer for Frodo during this thrid part as well.
Of LotR the only truly enjoyable part both on film and in writing for me is The Fellowship Of The Ring.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 18.07.2010 at 16:19

The ending of the film is one of the lamest most tearjerking scenes I have ever come across. PLus Sam gets gayer and gayer for Frodo during this thrid part as well.
Of LotR the only truly enjoyable part both on film and in writing for me is The Fellowship Of The Ring.

Can't say I remember the ending a lot, other than Aragorn becoming the king obviously.

Yeah, the fellowship is by far the best part of the trilogy.

And true, there's something just strange about Sam and Frodo. It's like Brokeback Mountain (which, by the way I didn't watch )

Aaw now the medieval geek in me is angry yes the LOTR franchise could've been done way better in the movies then it turned out to be but it's far from deserving a spot on the Worst Movie Ever list.Yo-Yo Girl Cop now that's a good contender for the title. here is the imdb link enjoy.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0781084/plotsummary

Written by [user id=4365] on 18.07.2010 at 12:32

Lol, I just remembered the biggest plot hole of all time. It involves Lord of the Rings and flying creatures. I think it's pretty obvious what I'm talking about. I bet a certain individual chose to ignore the plot contrivances of that one.

I simply refer you to this:
www.sean-crist.com/personal/pages/eagles/index.html

Looks like mister plot-hole will have to find a new favourite franchise. Ooh, I'm such a bitch!

Supposing for a moment, that I agree with the eagles carrying the ring (and this has been done to death by fans and nonfans alike on IMDB), it would be something the filmmakers can not do anything about. If it is a problem, then it is a problem of the book, not of the film.

As to the actual debate. It is true that neither the books nor the films rule out the possibility of using eagles, but both insist upon secrecy. Big eagles in the sky vs small hobbits with elven cloaks. Take your pick.

"You're not a bitch. You're bitching, but you're not a bitch."