The title says it all.
Worst movie(s) you've ever seen.
- Thread starter ChimpPhobiaFilms
- Start date
Plump Fiction
Silence of the Hams
The Ginger-beard Man 3: Saturday Night Cleaver
The Tony Blair Witch Project
Silence of the Hams
The Ginger-beard Man 3: Saturday Night Cleaver
The Tony Blair Witch Project
Ah, this could be a tricky question.
If a sucky film is profitable then is it really sucky?
For example:
Now, let's consider audience appreciation.
Next bad film: Pot Zombies - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0466392/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRUm0ZBl868
$1k prod budget, isn't even feature length movie long.
It sucks, and it's not even a movie. But it got distribution and people are watching it. Sort of. Barely. Does that count?
From a production company POV, pick your poison: biggest loser by absolute number or by negative ROI?
All that clarified, for me it's a toss up between the production values of either the non-movie 'Pot Zombies' and the feature length film 'Yeti: A Gay Love Story.'
They both fail on different levels.
If a sucky film is profitable then is it really sucky?
For example:
Bigfoot - $40k http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0834897/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1a
vs.
Yeti: A Love Story - $0.2k http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0765488/?ref_=sr_1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0wbdyGGsIc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AHLjjZbIKw
Two wildly different production costs (estimated), but who's to say Troma Entertainment paid more for the distribution rights for Bigfoot than they did for Yeti: A Love Story JUST BECAUSE THE FORMER COST MORE THAN THE LATTER TO MAKE?!
Five bucks says they both got paid nearly the same for the distribution rights, but 'Bigfoot' would likely be a financial loss for its production company while 'Yeti: A Gay Love Story' was likely profitable for it's prod co.
vs.
Yeti: A Love Story - $0.2k http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0765488/?ref_=sr_1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0wbdyGGsIc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AHLjjZbIKw
Two wildly different production costs (estimated), but who's to say Troma Entertainment paid more for the distribution rights for Bigfoot than they did for Yeti: A Love Story JUST BECAUSE THE FORMER COST MORE THAN THE LATTER TO MAKE?!
Five bucks says they both got paid nearly the same for the distribution rights, but 'Bigfoot' would likely be a financial loss for its production company while 'Yeti: A Gay Love Story' was likely profitable for it's prod co.
Now, let's consider audience appreciation.
Bigfoot - Published on Aug 12, 2012 - 39,157 views, 134 likes - 22 dislikes = 6:1 ratio
Yeti : A Gay Love Story - Published on Jul 20, 2012 - 66,369 views, 498 likes - 68 dislikes = 7.3:1 ratio
Yeti : A Gay Love Story - Published on Jul 20, 2012 - 66,369 views, 498 likes - 68 dislikes = 7.3:1 ratio
Next bad film: Pot Zombies - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0466392/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRUm0ZBl868
$1k prod budget, isn't even feature length movie long.
It sucks, and it's not even a movie. But it got distribution and people are watching it. Sort of. Barely. Does that count?
From a production company POV, pick your poison: biggest loser by absolute number or by negative ROI?
Biggest Money Losers, Based on Absolute Loss on Worldwide Gross: John Carter
- or -
Biggest Money Losers, Based on Return on Investment: All the Queen's Men
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/records/budgets.php
- or -
Biggest Money Losers, Based on Return on Investment: All the Queen's Men
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/records/budgets.php
All that clarified, for me it's a toss up between the production values of either the non-movie 'Pot Zombies' and the feature length film 'Yeti: A Gay Love Story.'
They both fail on different levels.
Those are all Oscar contenders compared to 'The Guardian' (1990).
The bit I had the most trouble with was when the tree beat up and killed some chainsaw-wielding Hells Angels in the Los Angeles forest.
14% on Rotten Tomatoes which is 14% more than it deserves.
The bit I had the most trouble with was when the tree beat up and killed some chainsaw-wielding Hells Angels in the Los Angeles forest.
14% on Rotten Tomatoes which is 14% more than it deserves.
How those movies get on IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes is a mystery to me. (I smell bribing)
Well...
Last edited:
The Avengers.
Not the superhero one, the spy one. Last thing I remember was Sean Connery and a bunch of other people in giant teddy bear costumes sitting around a conference table. My friends and I just looked at each other and we all stood up and walked out. That's the only time I've ever walked out on a movie in a theater...
Not the superhero one, the spy one. Last thing I remember was Sean Connery and a bunch of other people in giant teddy bear costumes sitting around a conference table. My friends and I just looked at each other and we all stood up and walked out. That's the only time I've ever walked out on a movie in a theater...
OMG, where do I begin?
*keeps silent, I know I'm going to upset someone*
*keeps silent, I know I'm going to upset someone*
I liked Punch Drunk Love.
But then again I am a huge PT Anderson fan. I like ALL of his movies.
But then again I am a huge PT Anderson fan. I like ALL of his movies.
battlefield earth -- bad movie AND lost money. 
Poultrygiest: Night of the Chicken Dead
Lawnmower Man 2: Beyond Cyberspace
Santa and the Icecream Bunny
Evil Brain from Outspace
Santa Claus conquers the Martians
Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare
Lawnmower Man 2: Beyond Cyberspace
Santa and the Icecream Bunny
Evil Brain from Outspace
Santa Claus conquers the Martians
Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare
I think it's all perspective, one mans trash etc but one movie I wish I could unwatch is gayniggers from outer space.
I'll avoid that one. I looked it up on wiki, and it sounds disturbing.
What were they on when they made that?
What were they on when they made that?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6C5WwammH90
My dad worked for the guys who primarily financed Lawnmower Man and Lawnmower Man II.
2 wiped out all the profits from the first, successful movie and effectively put the company out of business.
Strangely enough, the first movie was low budget while the second had a big budget. It's an inspiration to me as I know that money doesn't always buy a good movie.
This is one of 200 reasons for creating a different production company (LLC) for EACH film.