the worst movies of all time

[creaturerevenge]

Like the film or not I don't think Peter Jackson's King Kong did anything to take away from the original, the original Kong is still just as incredible now as it ever was, that being said I did thoroughly enjoy his remake. It consider it a wholly separate film though. No way is it better than the original, it's just a different film. To me the good thing about remakes (some... not all) is they usually do a good job at introducing a great story to a new generation, if nothing else I think they deserve some credit for that. And if you don't like it, just don't watch it.

[marsattacks666]

Like the film or not I don't think Peter Jackson's King Kong did anything to take away from the original, the original Kong is still just as incredible now as it ever was, that being said I did thoroughly enjoy his remake. It consider it a wholly separate film though. No way is it better than the original, it's just a different film. To me the good thing about remakes (some... not all) is they usually do a good job at introducing a great story to a new generation, if nothing else I think they deserve some credit for that. And if you don't like it, just don't watch it.

I totally expected that. If you don't like it, don't watch it. Isn't that always same statement for the ages.
What makes me laugh about this, is, I never dissected DEAD/ALIVE or KING KONG I, just based my opinion
like everyone else. Don't like the films, and will never watched them again. BUT, to formulate an opinion
of a film or films, I do believe one should watch the film(s) at least twice. Really, not everyone likes the same movies.
I love all of Ed Wood's films, but most people don't. The same with H.G. Lewis, David Friedman, Russ Meyer, Roger Corman,
Jack Hill, etc. I love their films, most people do not.


Anywayyyyyyyy! So boring! They are just movies, and just entertainment. Blah.,blah, blah.

[creaturerevenge]

I just think that its only fair that if one person gets to voice their dislike for a film that it's only fair for people who do like it to explain why they do like it. I'm not trying to say anything negative about anyone's opinion. It's just like how I got people defending Invaders from Mars when I posted on here that i didn't like it. You're right, movies are just meant to entertain and everyone likes and dislikes different films for different reasons. I'm in the same boat as you, I LOVE Ed Wood films, and there are a lot of people I know who think I am insane for liking them so much. I'm just making conversation about it, that's all.

[RedKing]

For me the worst movies ever made are 99% of the over budgeted CGI laden crap that Hollywood churns out nowadays. I would much rather watch an Ed Wood movie, Godzilla or a classic Universal movie over the garbage that passes for movies today like the Twilight crap, Transformers (I HATE the design of the characters!) or even something highly praised like AVATAR. The non stop CGI never looks real to me, it looks like a glorified cartoon. Give me make up, prosthetics and guys in monster suits anyday!!

[marsattacks666]

I do have to agree with most movie fanatics. All of the Twilight films are the worst. The classics will always work for me. But, I am not saying that recent movies suck. I just prefer the classics.

[Haunted hearse]

In the Fright Night remake, I love how angry Eddie is when he tells his friend, "I can't believe you thought I read Twighlight."  Speaking of early efforts, John Landis was at a sci-fi convention, where they showed his film "Schlock"  He stated, at the time he made it, he was going "This is Baad!  This is so Baad!".  years leater, he looked at his early effort, and went, "This is bad.  This is so bad."

[creaturerevenge]

That being said, Schlock still managed to launch not only his career, but Mr. Rick Baker's career awesome with that surprisingly impressive ape costume he made for Mr. Landis. The film is terrible... still has a place in my heart though, it's one of those films that watching it and knowing the story behind it makes up for how bad it is. I have an original release Schlock poster signed by John hanging in my office!

[neonnoodle]

I loved SHLOCK, ya know.  Once at a convention I spotted John Landis coming in my direction, and I shouted, "Hey, John Landis!" and he looked over at me and I said "I just want to say that I really, really, REALLY loved 'Schlock.'"  And he looked genuinely pleased.

It is a cheap movie but a lot of work went into it, and it is extremely funny and silly.  Plus it now has that 70's patina that is for me the very glow of paradise.  I love the look of 70's flicks...

[Scatter]

I just think that its only fair that if one person gets to voice their dislike for a film that it's only fair for people who do like it to explain why they do like it. I'm not trying to say anything negative about anyone's opinion. It's just like how I got people defending Invaders from Mars when I posted on here that i didn't like it. You're right, movies are just meant to entertain and everyone likes and dislikes different films for different reasons. I'm in the same boat as you, I LOVE Ed Wood films, and there are a lot of people I know who think I am insane for liking them so much. I'm just making conversation about it, that's all.

"If you don't like it, just don't watch it" isn't conversational. It's dismissive at the very least, and essentially ENDS conversation, doesn't it??

BTW, I'm a fellow lover of Ed Wood............so we have common ground after all!! 

How much of his stuff have you seen?? Have you ever been able to find his later stuff from the 60s and 70s?? I always wondered if he ever got any better technically.........but somehow I doubt it.

[creaturerevenge]

I only went the "If you don't like it route..." since the conversation seemed to be heading in a more argumentative direction, I always love discussing and casually debating movies but I always hate getting into hardcore arguments about movies. I don't think movies exist for the purpose of causing arguments. Like any form of entertainment, they are designed to entertain and to make you think and it's always nice to share thoughts and feelings about them, but when it goes into bickering about films I think it looses the point. I didn't mean for it to come across nasty or anything, if it did I apologize.

As for Ed Wood... no his stuff never really got any better. I've seen just about everything he's done with a few exceptions. His later stuff pretty much became awkward creepy porn. In a way it lost it's charm. All of his films are really bad, that's the point, and the fact that he didn't care and made them anyway simply because HE enjoyed them makes them all the better. As his films went on his production value stayed right on course but the effort put into the films didn't seem to be there. For as bad as Plan 9 and Bride of the Monster were you can see the love and passion he put into them, it really comes through in the final film. Starting around the Orgy of the Dead period (he didn't actually direct it, but wrote it and left directing up to newcomer A.C. Stephen) it kinda lost that spark. And by the time he reached the Young Marrieds and Necromania period he was pretty much just making bizarre porn to pay the bills and keep working. There is a book out called Nightmare of Ecstasy all about the life and works of Ed Wood. It's the book that inspired Tim Burton to do his film about Ed Wood (my personal favorite film of all time!) it's out of print but not impossible to find. If you are a Wood fan I HIGHLY recommend it!

[Scatter]

I only went the "If you don't like it route..." since the conversation seemed to be heading in a more argumentative direction, I always love discussing and casually debating movies but I always hate getting into hardcore arguments about movies. I don't think movies exist for the purpose of causing arguments. Like any form of entertainment, they are designed to entertain and to make you think and it's always nice to share thoughts and feelings about them, but when it goes into bickering about films I think it looses the point. I didn't mean for it to come across nasty or anything, if it did I apologize.

NP my friend. It's VERY hard to gauge intent sometimes through the written word. I like a spirited debate though!!

As for Ed Wood... no his stuff never really got any better. I've seen just about everything he's done with a few exceptions. His later stuff pretty much became awkward creepy porn. In a way it lost it's charm. All of his films are really bad, that's the point, and the fact that he didn't care and made them anyway simply because HE enjoyed them makes them all the better. As his films went on his production value stayed right on course but the effort put into the films didn't seem to be there. For as bad as Plan 9 and Bride of the Monster were you can see the love and passion he put into them, it really comes through in the final film. Starting around the Orgy of the Dead period (he didn't actually direct it, but wrote it and left directing up to newcomer A.C. Stephen) it kinda lost that spark. And by the time he reached the Young Marrieds and Necromania period he was pretty much just making bizarre porn to pay the bills and keep working. There is a book out called Nightmare of Ecstasy all about the life and works of Ed Wood. It's the book that inspired Tim Burton to do his film about Ed Wood (my personal favorite film of all time!) it's out of print but not impossible to find. If you are a Wood fan I HIGHLY recommend it!

I'll try to find a copy! Ed Wood fascinates me. I always wondered what he could have done with a decent film budget. Would it just have been more expensive bizarreness?? Likely so. But it would have allowed him to give even freer reign to his weird impulses, and that could ONLY be a good thing!!

[creaturerevenge]

Whats interesting about the Ed Wood films is how much the movies (and him really) were victims of circumstance. He always did whatever he had to do to make his movies and tell his stories, which is why he would end up in situations like having a movie about grave robbers from outer space and the walking dead paid for and produced by a church group! Only he could pull something like that off. He had to have his entire crew get baptized in order for the church to agree to fund his movie! On top of that halfway through production the group almost pulled funding because it was so bad! Had the film not been made under those conditions I don't know that it would have been the film we know and love today. Because he had to work so hard to make them, it gives them a certain quality. I wonder if having had the larger budgets like you mentioned would have helped or just make the movies plain out bad instead of them being loveable bad.

[Scatter]

 Lovably bad...........not a bad way to put it. Like some of Cormans stuff, there remains a certain charm to its awfulness that just isn't duplicated today. I had someone mention that the garbage that Sci-Fi puts out will be remembered by the kids who saw it in the same way that we remember Wood and Corman and Herschell Gordon Lewis, etc etc etc. No way. Those are just cheap films made by guys doing a job cheaply. Say what you want about Wood et al, but those guys had a PASSION for what they were doing, and it imparted something that the cameras captured.

[creaturerevenge]

I agree, I'll tune into SyFy (I still miss Sci-Fi Channel as it were... you know back in the days of MST3K and Ms. Cleo psychic commercials!) for a cheap laugh at some crap CG giant alligator movie, but it's gotten to the point where those movies are made by a bunch of guys sitting around trying to make a purposely bad movie. And that's all they are setting out to do. Wood had a love of making movies and telling stories, he just unfortunately never made them or told them well, but he sure as hell tried to! Corman had a who different philosophy: I'm going to make as many movies as a humanly can and maybe SOME of them will turn out good! Sure enough some of them did... but most of the didn't but they are still damn enjoyable! That man made 4 and 5 films a year! And most of them were made at the same time!

[CreepysFan]

Lovably bad....not a bad way to put it. Like some of Cormans stuff, there remains a certain charm to its awfulness that just isn't duplicated today.

   

  Well 'Attack Of The Crab Monsters' may not be high class sci-fi, but I like that Corman film.  Fifties and Sixties sci-fi B movies rock, just my humble opinion of course.