Talk:List of films considered the worst/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10 ← Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

Removing Heavens Gate

While it was a notorious bomb upon release, Heavens Gate has since been re-evaluated as a misunderstood masterpiece. I don't think that such a movie deserves to be heaped in the same dogpile as Superman 4, Manos, Inchon, and Mac and Me. Even Mommie Dearest and Ishtar have redeeming qualities, and decent critical receptions. I feel that a movie should not be included on the list if it has since been reevaluated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:542B:7C08:88D6:8211:B8:F089 (talk) 11:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. It's not like The Thing (1982) is here either despite it getting scathing reviews at the time of its initial release. --85.76.1.118 (talk) 15:33, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
A few things to consider, mainly WP:RECENTISM. Reception can change over time but nothing can change the fact that after its release in 1980 it was considered amongst the worst films ever made. That said, critics at the time saw a totally different cut than the one available today so it was almost an entirely different film. I think the section adequately describes the convoluted history and totally omitting the film isn't an option. Any source that writes seriously about "worst films" covers Heaven's Gate in some way, even if they disagree with its placement there.LM2000 (talk) 05:31, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

British Cast?

"attempt to portray Americans using a largely British cast (including an early role for Sid James)." Err... Sid James was South African, not British. Stub Mandrel (talk) 21:30, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

He lived in Britain since 1946 and held dual citizenship.Epomis87 (talk) 12:36, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Add The Astro-Zombies and remove Bat Pussy and Meet the Spartans?

If you look at the reception for The Astro-Zombies, you can see it is suggested to be one of the worst films ever made. Does that mean it meets the article's criteria? I think it would also be nice to remove Bat Pussy because yes, pornography is a genre, and Meet the Spartans because there is only one quote on its section of this article and the lists might not be enough of a spectrum to suggest it is one of the worst films ever made (especially considering Son of the Mask has recently been removed even though it had lists to help back it up yet did not meet the criteria). 2A00:23C5:6E03:E200:97C:35BD:5263:E666 (talk) 17:53, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2019

In the Monster a Go-Go! section, please change compose to comprise -- a common mistake. 2606:A000:1126:28D:F935:C7E2:FE1:E49 (talk) 21:50, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

 Done —KuyaBriBriTalk 02:19, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Dragonball Evolution

On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film scored 14% based on 58 reviews. The site's consensus states: "Executed with little panache or invention, Dragonball Evolution lacks the magic that made the books upon which it was based a cult sensation." On Metacritic it received a rating of 45 based on 10 reviews, indicating "mixed or average reviews."

Zac Bertschy of Anime News Network, who was initially annoyed at fans of the franchise who criticized the film via leaked set shots and trailers before the film's release, gave the film an overall failing grade and stated "the fans were right." He criticized the film's lack of explaining plot elements, its hackneyed storyline and lackluster effort by the actors. Variety's Russell Edwards found the film "passable", "pleasing if paint-by-numbers", noting it "doesn't take itself too seriously, but avoids campiness", that "the climactic clash between Piccolo and Goku offers a faithful CGI representation of the ethereal powers as drawn in the original manga" and that the climax offers an "impressive character twist for Goku that will warm the cockles of every young Jungian's heart." Luke Thompson of E! Online referred to the film as a "surreal mess" that would only make sense to fans of the original series. He questioned the use of a Caucasian in the main role and felt Chow Yun-Fat was "overacting like never before", but did consider it "fun in a train-wreck kind of way" and that while it was never boring it was also never "logical, coherent [or] rational".

However, Christoper Monfette of IGN gave the film a positive review, stating that it "is perhaps the most successful live-action film to date to utilize costume, production and audio design—not to mention some inspired fight choreography—to provide the flavor of anime without becoming overly cartoonish". He praised the main cast for "creating characters the audience can actually care about" and felt Chatwin was particularly likeable as Goku. Slant Magazine's Rob Humanick considered the film "uninspired" and implausible with an "aimlessly hyperactive construction and complete lack of substance" and "cobbled-together FX fakery". Reviewing the film for Australia's ABC Radio National, Jason Di Rosso stated the film was "lacking the visual panache of recent graphic novel adaptations". He agreed the film was uninspired and also felt it had dull "high school movie banter" dialog and was "cliché-ridden". The Village Voice's Aaron Hillis called the film a "loony live-action adaptation", but felt it was "more entertaining than it deserves to be" and would likely appeal to ten-year-old boys. Alonso Duralde of MSNBC found the film to be "both entertainingly ridiculous and ridiculously entertaining" and noted that "kids will have such a blast that you can turn this movie into the gateway kung-fu drug that makes them want to watch the earlier work of Stephen Chow and Chow Yun-Fat, that is if Stephen Chow and Chow Yun-fat had a Caucasian actor in the starring role." Jeffrey K. Lyles of The Gazette found the film to be "a fairly entertaining martial arts adventure for the younger audiences" and tolerable to adults. He felt Chatwin was ill-cast as Goku, a white kid raised by his Asian Grandfather Randall Duk Kim and that director Wong failed to capture the "frenetic sense of the anime" in the action scenes, leaving them an effort to understand. Passable."

The film was nominated for a 2009 Spike TV Scream Award for "Best Comic Book Movie," but lost to Watchmen.

Suggestion

  • List of animated films known for negative reception?

Foodfight (2012)

Foodfight! is present on the list of removed films, primarily because its limited release garnered fairly little critical attention. However since then it has slowly accumulated some retrospective reviews from major publications. These have been universally terrible. It has appeared on some "worst" lists. The current status of critical opinion is summarised at Foodfight!#Critical_reception. I believe a reassessment is in order. --LukeSurl t c 10:39, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

I support adding the film. The only one which explicitly calls it the worst (or "crappiest piece of crap") is Hollywood News, which admittedly isn't the strongest source, but it has as many reviews calling it "one of the worst" as I've ever seen. Alternatively, I don't believe it has any positive coverage, or even lukewarm coverage. Nathan Rabin, who wrote a piece for the AV Club that is included in the Foodfight! article, revisited the film earlier this year, stating: "... when I decided to write about it for My World of Flops in 2013. I had never even heard of Foodfight! I had no idea what I was in for. I came to it blind and was overjoyed to discover that it was no mere bad movie. No, this was the kind of bad movie I live for. This is the kind of movie so unbelievably, surreally and exquisitely terrible that you want to share it with the rest of the world. I was put on earth to suffer through abominations like Foodfight! so that society as a whole might benefit from my Christ-like sacrifice."LM2000 (talk) 19:13, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
It's a direct-to-video animated film and this list is mostly comprised of theatrically-released titles. Espngeek (talk) 19:10, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
It was direct-to-video is some countries but had a small theatrical release in others, including the UK. That's not unlike others in this list.LM2000 (talk) 20:44, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

The Goldfinch

Yes, I know, it has not had a wide release yet but it is already looking like it is set to bomb at the Box office. The reviews are also pretty poor, maybe one to look out for in the upcoming few months. Theprussian (talk) 17:50, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

I would tend to not include this. First of all, being a box office bomb ist not a criteria for this site. There have been enough films that bombed at the box office despite having positive reviews. Second, being a critical failure is not a criteria either - there are tons of films with negative critical reception, this list is only for films that are considered the worst of all time. And tbh I consider it unlikely that this film will qualify for the list as the reviews are bad, but not entirely negative (RT 26%, MC 40/100).Epomis87 (talk) 14:30, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
The Goldfinch (film): Rotten Tomatoes 25%, Metacritic 40%. Flawed, but not the worst. -- 109.79.75.126 (talk) 04:09, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Recentism

This list has problem with recentism, to call a film the worst of the year (2019) when the year is not even over is crazy. I suggest that this list should not include any film that is not at least a year old. Gotti (2018 film) might be deserving of a place on this list but more likely it and films like Loqueesha will merely be forgotten. (Entertainment.ie may have called Loqueesha the worst but if you read that article there's no indication the writer watched anything more than the trailer, he certainly didn't review the film itself, unlike The Guardian.) It seems far too soon to say for sure if Loqueesha belongs on this list, but as a film with only 5 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, it seems unlikely to be notable enough. Did it even get a theatrical release?

A lot of the films from the last 10 years also seem like bad but forgettable films. The list includes 3 films from Happy Madison but based on the short overview here alone it is clear there was a consensus that Jack and Jill was far worse than either of the other than the other two. Bucky Larson failed to even be the worst film of 2011, it seems undue to include it on this list at all. With many more years of hindsight I think it should be removed from this list and forgotten. Critics bash a film at the time of release but if a film deserves to be on this list it should be the kind of film that by the end of the year critics haven't forgotten it and still hate it enough to mention, or that gets retrospective reviews for being truly the worst. Films like Mortdecai get panned but are soon forgotten. Movie 43 (2013) probably does deserve to be on the list but given its reputation I wouldn't want watch it to find out for sure, but it did seem to continue to annoy critics and was the kind of awful film that they would compare other awful films to.

As the end of the decade approaches I think this list should be reviewed. Not all films are memorably awful enough for critics to hate them enough to include them on end of the year lists, let alone a whole decade later. British critic Mark Kermode took a look at (in his very personal opinion) the worst films of the past ten years (2008-2018) and a decade later still vividly recalls how much he hated The Hottie and the Nottie, but he largely saved his vitriol for films that were commercially successful but panned by critics, so none of the rest of his choices are likely to be included on this list. In summary, I think this list should be reviewed and several of the films from the last decade should be reevaluated and removed from this list. -- 109.79.75.126 (talk) 02:21, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

I looked at Talk:List_of_films_considered_the_worst/Removed_films, it seems as if Bucky Larson has been removed from this list before? -- 109.79.75.126 (talk) 03:52, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
I agree that Loqueesha should not be on this list. We have criteria, listed at the top of this page, that says "a broad spectrum of both casual and professional film critics" must consider the candidate the worst movie of all time to be included. Although it was roundly panned, including as a worst of the year/decade candidate, only one source called it the worst ever. As for the other films, I think it would be WP:RECENTISM to remove them. Kermode may not consider The Hottie and the Nottie to have been the worst movie of all time but we do have sources from enough critics who do. The violence and sexual content of No Orchids for Miss Blandish was apparently too much for audiences to stomach in 1948 but pales in comparison to such content nowadays. That doesn't mean the film should be removed, at the time it was considered to be the worst and much has been written about it. Unless the critics involved issued retractions for their bad reviews, these reviews will be around forever and will continue to meet our criteria. A one year moratorium on inclusion would not change this.LM2000 (talk) 20:38, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
I'd appreciate if you removed Loqueesha from the list, on the basis of not being broadly notable, if not for it being too recent. Interesting counterpoint about WP:RECENTISM. (I think there is also a certain amount of WP:COATRACK and selection bais when people are determined to get a film on this list
Perhaps I wasn't entirely clear, but unlike some critics who might declare a film to be the worst but never mention it again, I was trying to use Kermode's negative review to show that over a decade later The Hottie and the Nottie is still reviled and that it does deserve to be on this list, more than most. Many critics will claim a film is the worst, but it really stands out when critics say a film is the worst they've seen since Jack and Jill, or the worst they've seen since Movie 43 and with cold hindsight continue to lambast a film. -- 109.77.208.104 (talk) 21:04, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
And Loqueesha's gone, at least until I get reverted. I agree that there are some films which are used as a barometer against other horrible movies. Inappropriate Comedy is a film that used to get added here a lot, critics called it "worse than Movie 43" or "worst since Movie 43". There are also movies like Hottie and the Nottie which are considered the worst for a short time but fail to live up to the level a level of infamy achieved by The Room and Plan 9 From Outer Space. Other movies like An American Hippie in Israel and Kidnapping, Caucasian Style! were disasters in their native countries but aren't remembered internationally. I don't know if there's anything we could or should do about that for this list. Coatracking is also a problem, sometimes one source will call it the worst and it will be included in this list with lots of bad review padding. Loqueesha is a good example of that.LM2000 (talk) 22:49, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Emoji Movie

People today still call Emoji Movie one of the worst films ever. Should it be added?

"People" is just a weasel word, not a reliable source. If you can find multiple reliable, independent sources that say it's one of the worst films ever made, then you can consider adding it. However, so far there don't seem to have been any such sources as the film was already added many times but always got removed again for lack of sources that say it's one of the worst films of all time (and that's all that counts, neither worst film of 2017 nor worst animated film nor winning a razzie for worst film is enough to justify inclusion). See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_films_considered_the_worst/Removed_films Epomis87 (talk) 15:17, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Just bad or so bad they are good?

It feels like this list could use some kind of division between films that have gained cult status for being so bad that they have turned good and films that are really the worst. As it is now, with both kinds of bad movies it's hard to tell the intent of it. At least it would be nice if the descriptions made it clear for each film... --Amphioxi (talk) 00:18, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

  • The introduction already says this quite clearly, or doesn't it? "Films on these lists are generally feature-length films that are commercial/artistic in nature (intended to turn a profit and/or to express personal statements)" Maybe some of these films became so bad it's good (Plan 9 from Outer Space and The Room come to mind), but that's not what their directors wanted it to be. Films on this list are generally meant to be taken serious but failed at it - as opposed to films that were never meant to be good (e.g. Sharknado).Was ist schon ein Name? (talk) 10:46, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Loqueesha

While, like Cats, it may be a little early to call this, but I've heard multiple sources call Loqueesha one of the worst movies ever made. Joel Golby of The Guardian called it "the worst film ever made,"[1] Dan K of Popdust called it "genuinely the worst movie I've ever watched"[2], and Entertainment.ie not only called it the "worst movie of this decade," but "one the worst f*cking things we have ever seen."[3] Songwaters (talk) 02:24, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

I removed this previously and added it to Talk:List of films considered the worst/Removed films because the only "worst" source given was The Guardian one. Popdust doesn't have an article but is used on other articles so it should be an okay addition. I will not remove again if it gets re-added. Entertainment.ie seems to just be referring to the trailer though.LM2000 (talk) 19:58, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
  • WatchMojo claimed this as worst of 2019, one of the worst coimedies of the last decade and one of the worst of the last decade Espngeek (talk) 12:38, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Watchmojo is just a clickbait YouTube channel and is not considered a reliable source.Was ist schon ein Name? (talk) 09:23, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Foodfight!

Since we already have multiple sources claiming Foodfight! to be considered the worst animated film ever made, would it be a good addition to the list? ToThAc (talk) 20:44, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

The adventures of Pluto Nash, and cats

Anyone here think that these two might fit on here? Justsomehistorynerd (talk) 15:19, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Pluto Nash was met with poor critical reception but was more remembered for being a huge commercial flop than for being a particularly bad film. Cats is way too new to be considered suitable for this list and should not yet be added (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Recentism). And in both cases, the basic inclusion criteria are multiple, reliable independent sources that claim it to be one of the worst films ever. If you are able to find such sources, then you may consider adding these films.Was ist schon ein Name? (talk) 11:23, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Norm of the North

I think Norm of the North should be included on this list. Critics disliked it and it even held a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes before being upgraded to a 9%. --24.188.22.145 (talk) 22:25, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Simply having critics dislike it and being having a 0% RT rating isn't enough for inclusion. However, it can possibly be added if multiple reliable sources that call it to be one of the worst films of all time were to be found. GreatZerosReefCome say hi! 14:31, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

The Clone Wars

I personally think that The Clone Wars should be added on the list. Although critical reception was generally negative, the film is known for being the beginning of a critically acclaimed TV series. --24.188.22.145 (talk) 00:26, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

  • Unnecessary and unsourced entry Espngeek (talk) 03:25, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

what about The Apple

whatever happened to this film?: The Apple — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jetcold0 (talk • contribs) 02:19, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Someone added this to the list by copying and pasting the reception section from the main article. A quote from Mike Lancaster of Stinkers calling it the worst he had ever seen is included but not backed up in sources. Can anyone source the quote?LM2000 (talk) 17:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
It's already on there. Espngeek (talk) 01:05, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
The source shows only that it was nominated for a Stinkers award in 1980.LM2000 (talk) 02:12, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Death Of A Nation (2018)

Poydoo TheJoebro64 Why did you REPEATEDLY removed this film removed? SAaphIrEblUE (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Because the film has been discussed here, and it was decided that although the film is really bad, it isn't the worst film ever. Poydoo can talk and edit 16:21, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Note that this film is on the list of films removed from the article. JOEBRO64 16:27, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
    • Poydoo TheJoebro64 It was listed as among the worst, if not the worst, by Haaretz, Metacritic, Roger Ebert, Vanity, The A.V. Club, Variety, Chicago Tribune, and The Playlist listed "Death of a Nation" among the worst films of the year. The film was also panned by Hollywood Reporter while Bill Goodykoontz of The Arizona Republic described the documentary as "messy, unintentionally hilarious". Their criticsms sure supported the views that "Death Of A Nation" ranks among the "List of films considered worse" at least for 2018.SAaphIrEblUE (talk) 17:36, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
      • This list is for films considered the worst of all time, not worst of THE YEAR. Only one reliable source, Metacritic, comes close to saying that and even then it is tied with five other films for the lowest score on the site; only two of them appear on this list. We need multiple sources to show a broad spectrum of critics describing this as the worst movie ever made.LM2000 (talk) 17:45, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
        • I concur with LM2000 that the film needs to be considered the worst of all time, not of the year. We would need reliable sources that look back and recognize it as such. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 19:12, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
          • Wait, "the film needs to be considered the worst of all time, not of the year" then why are both Jack and Jill and Bucky Larson still included on the list? Apparently Bucky Larson was previously on the removed list, and I'm sure it is terribly but I don't think it is both terrible and NOTABLE, nor do I think it was the worst film of that year. Sources support that Jack and Jill was hated by critics, and for years after. Keeping Bucky Larson on this list only distracts from the true awfulness of Jack and Jill. -- 109.76.217.83 (talk) 00:32, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

MOS:ANDOR

Please edit the intro of the article to comply with MOS:ANDOR (also MOS:SLASH).

Replace and/or with any one from the following list

  1. and
  2. or
  3. and but not both

Thanks. -- 109.76.217.83 (talk) 00:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done! GoingBatty (talk) 20:57, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Cats?

Cats was just released this week, so its too early to judge whether or not its worthy of this list, but so far the critics are tearing it apart and I have already counted two high-profile publications specifically calling it out as a "worst film": The Hollywood Reporter named it one of the worst films of 2019 the day of its release [4] and The Detroit News called it, "the biggest disaster of the decade, and possibly thus far in the millennium" and compared it to Battlefield Earth.[5] Worth watching to see if more critics begin making similar statements. This could be an early shoo-in like Jack and Jill. Reattacollector (talk) 20:01, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Agreed - it's already had a relentless barrage of negative reviews and it's performing badly enough that the CGI is supposedly going to be revamped for a subsequent cut https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/dec/23/cats-film-resupplied-improved-visuals . It's obviously too early to contextualise this, but it's probably going to be a worthy (or should that be unworthy?) addition to this list in future. 2A00:23C5:C92D:C101:6427:D14B:4092:5E28 (talk) 13:11, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Maybe in a few years when there are multiple, reliable sources that call it one of the worst films of all time, but really only then. There are tons of films with strongly negative reception, this list is only for the worst. And so far it seems unlikely that this film will qualify as the reception is rather negative, but not completely (RT 18%, MC 32/100).Was ist schon ein Name? (talk) 10:41, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Was actually just about to start a discussion on here, then seen this one. I think you could easily find reliable sources claiming it to be one of the worst, even though it’s still a new film. It’s current rating on IMDB is 2.8 making it lower than most films on here. Lukejordan02 (talk) 10:22, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Agreed, Cats has some of the lowest reviews ever seen and is still gaining traction for the fact they are patching it whilst it is still in the cinema. I think I've seen a few sources calling it "the worst movie of the decade", so the inclusion of cats is reasonable in my view.Theprussian (talk) 21:14, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
LA Times and Daily Mail have made articles where they collected reviews savaging the film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.220.45 (talk) 23:58, February 7, 2020 (UTC)

Screw it. I say let's add it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheOneAndOnlyOne (talk • contribs) 16:29, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I would give serious consideration to adding "Cats" now that we are some months away from the initial reaction and we can be more level-headed and reasoned about its impact. Even now the dust has settled, "Cats" is generating YouTube videos analysing what went wrong, Twitter is still a good source of articles explaining the circumstances surrounding its release, there are plenty of interviews and off-record reports about the filming and how it was almost doomed from the start. Given its ratings, given its reputation, given its continued use as a punchline, and now that we are separate from the white heat of the immediate reaction, I think there is a very good case for adding it to this article. We could try to whip up a draft entry here before adding it to the article? doktorb wordsdeeds 07:00, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
I am very skeptical of any film added here before the end of year lists come out. Any film listed here should have at least managed to memorably terrible enough to still be listed as "the worst" when it comes time for critics to compile their end of year lists, and this list is "worst ever" so these films should be appearing on worst lists for years to come too. -- 109.76.217.83 (talk) 00:23, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
Yet another attempt to add Cats to the list. Cats is looking increasingly like it should be on this list, but that's no excuse for adding it without proper references.
Would be good to get a consensus on the talk page first and get some agreement about what sources to use. I would think a newspaper such as the Telegraph [6] (except for the annoyance of the article being paywalled). Metacritic does point out that there were 25 films with worse reviews than Cats[7] but this list does tend to require the combination of a film being both a disaster and high enough profile for people to notice and remember and that Cats seems to fit that bill. -- 109.79.188.174 (talk) 19:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
JD Shapiro, who we quote in the Battlefield Earth section, thinks this is worse.LM2000 (talk) 02:01, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Worst Animated Films

Why are there no animated films on the list? Stein256 (talk) 21:01, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

What animated films did you have in mind? It wouldn't surprise me if the list did not feature certain genres at all. Some bad films are simply disregarded by critics, it usually takes a particular combination of bad and high profile for a film to be called out as one of the worst ever and merit inclusion on this list. It doesn't surprise me that a lot of so-called-comedies are on the list, when critics hate them, they really hate them. -- 109.79.181.181 (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Contents 10: New section

In order to help make a more navigable page, I would like to propose bringing back the international section to categorise Non-English films considered the worst. The following films on the list would be moved to this section:

  • A Place for Lovers (1968)
  • HaMal'ach Haya Satan (The Angel Was a Devil) (1976)
  • Dunyayi Kurtaran Adam (The Man Who Saved the World) (1982)
  • Cattive Ragazze (Bad Girls) (1992)
  • Dis-En Historie om Kaerlighet (A Story About Love) (1995)
  • Le Jour et la Nuit (Day and Night) (1997)
  • Cinderela Baiana (Bahian Cinderella) (1998)
  • Daniel- Der Zauberer (Daniel-The Wizard) (2004)
  • Aag (2007)
  • Humshakals (2014)
  • Kidnapping, Caucasian Style! (2014)
  • Guardians (2017)

I would also propose adding John Derek ("Tarzan the Ape Man", "Bolero") to the Special cases list.

That is all I have for now.

Viewer200 (talk) 15:24, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

  • I don't think it's right to sort foreign language film differently, it gives English language films more prominence. I don't like the way we sort films though, I think we should have shorter entries with no subsections for every film entry, sort of like how List of music considered the worst looks.LM2000 (talk) 23:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Superman IV typo

Hi there, under Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, it has "Superman IV holds a 11% rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 44 reviews" where this should have "an 11% rating". Thanks! Crpstn² (talk) 15:41, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

I fixed it. Thanks for bringing it up. Poydoo can talk and edit 01:17, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing that, Poydoo! Crpstn² (talk) 15:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:12, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 July 2020

Can I add more films on here? I would add The Emoji Movie at least. Jackson Priestap (talk) 03:17, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Also, the films need to have a Wikipedia article and there needs to be reliable sources for them being described as "the worst" RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:22, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Please note that The Emoji Movie was previously considered but removed from the list.
See the list of films removed from the list of films considered the worst -- 109.79.69.228 (talk) 20:32, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

CATS

Could someone add Cats (2019 film) to the list? Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 18:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

King of Fighters, worst movie for live action video games franchise ?

There should be a section created for this. This is the worst movie I've ever seen. It's basically just names tagged on the video game characters. The customs, the hair, the attitude was nothing like in the game. It was the worst box office for a live action movie for video game franchises. I think this should be listed in the list of films considered the worst (for video games franchises).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King_of_Fighters_(film)

Budget $12 million Box office $2,370,613

Which would make it the worst box office bomb for a live action movie for game.

Other movies I didn't like was Dragonball Revolutions, the review was extremely negative. It did bad in the box office even though it got $58.2 million from a $30 million budget. The review and was response was so negative that they cancelled the sequel.But it still isn't nowhere as bad as The king of Fighters. Please look at the review, I just watched it 2 days ago and this definately is just a movie taking names of video game character. Nothing to do with the game. Another in why I think this is the worse movie is that Kyo Kusanagi, Mai Shiranui, Iori Yagami were played by non-Japanese. In the anime and video games they sound like Japanese but in the movoe the gave them perfect english speaking Asian American vibes, nothing Japanese. -Vamlos (talk) 03:17, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

You are more than welcome to add the film into the list yourself provided you can provide reliable sources that openly declare consensus on the film to be among the worst ever made. Unless and until that is done, this film, regardless of its quality, will not ever make the list. And please do not take this personally, but Wikipedia doesn't care what you think. That's probably rather blunt, but this is not the place to be discussing what YOU personally think belongs on a list such as this. Bear in mind also that negative reception is not in itself an indicator of "worst of all time" quality, no matter how severely the film in question was slandered by critics and the public. You are also free to create an article you place on your own blog or other Internet outlet over which you have creative control to make your case for this movie being among the worst of all time. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 21:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
The King of Fighters_(film) is probably too obscure to make it onto this list, not enough critics cared/were required to review it, let alone hate it enough to call it the worst rather than merely pointless. Dragonball Evolution is a bad film (and it seems to immensely annoy fans of the anime) but it managed to get mixed reviews on Metacritic (basic technical competence is often enough to keep a film off this list, at least you can say it was well lit and in focus), so it has no chance of being included on a list of the worst ever either.
Critics and in fact most people who have watched any film by Uwe Boll will probably disagree with you about worst film based on a video game. (He's already on the list.) -- 109.76.203.83 (talk) 12:37, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Cats section - Rebel Wilson and James Corden

The line "Critics also panned the performances of some of the actors, with James Corden and Rebel Wilson receiving most criticism, for their hypocritical criticism of the film and even getting into trouble with the Visual Effects Society for insulting the film's CG during the 92nd Academy Awards" seems to be a personal opinion. I was only able to see articles laughing at their Cats joke, and the only criticism seemed to be from the VES - not supporting the opinion that the two actors were singled out. ...the other is insane (talk) 23:44, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I think every source we could add has enough phrasing to show it's those two being singled out. See [8] [9] and [10] doktorb wordsdeeds 08:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
But the articles just say those two were criticized by the VES for that joke, not for "hypocritical criticism", which reeks too much of an agenda. ...the other is insane (talk) 00:43, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I think this sentence is very unclear and I can't actually tell exactly what it's saying. It seems to be talking about several completely unrelated things -- the performance of "some of the actors" in the film, some undescribed "hypocritical criticism" of the film by Corden and Wilson, and an "insulting" statement the two of them made at the Awards ceremony. It's not at all clear to me whether this sentence is saying that the two actors received the "most criticism" for their performance or for their post-film actions or for some combination of the two. I also don't think we should be describing their actions as "hypocritical" in Wikipedia's voice. CodeTalker (talk) 20:06, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. ...the other is insane (talk) 00:41, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I removed the "hypocritical criticism" but left the part about Corden and Wilson being singled out for criticism. I think this better reflects sources.LM2000 (talk) 19:42, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Would someone please fix the glaring WP:RELTIME failure already and remove the word "currently" from the Cats section. This is such a basic mistake yet it happens over and over again. Specify {{As of}} and include the date if you really want but the word "currently" should not have used in the first place, and it definitely shouldn't have survived this many seemingly knowledgeable experienced editors checking the details of that section. -- 109.76.203.83 (talk) 12:42, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. -- 109.76.203.83 (talk) 14:30, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Films redeemed by history?

I don't see this as needing any immediate action, but I couldn't help but notice films like Ishtar and Heaven's Gate have received critical re-evaluation that has helped improve their reputation over the years. Certainly they were lashed upon release, but I just wanted to throw this out there, for the record: What should we do in the event that a film once considered among the worst ever made experiences the popularity polynomial and becomes regarded as an actually good film? Just food for thought for right now, and so the record can reflect this was brought up before in case we need to deal with it down the line. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 16:27, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I think we handle it correctly the way we do it now. In the past people came to the talk page and asked that these films be removed and that's really not an option because any book written about films considered the worst includes them at some point. We expanded these sections to give a more balanced view on their contemporary reception and added "theatrical version" to the header where applicable. Many recent sources still haven't warmed to these films entirely though and I think that's reflected in these sections as well.LM2000 (talk) 18:07, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Right, but I'm talking in the hypothetical event things swing completely the other way and critical consensus comes to like, if not outright love, these films. There's nothing to change now, I'm just wondering what the plan might be if it ever comes to that. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 19:26, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Correction: I added the "theatrical version" on both At Long Last Love (1975) and Heaven's Gate (1980) Espngeek (talk) 19:46, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
The best we can do is to give a broad (but brief) summary on their reputations. I think it would be WP:RECENTISM to remove a film that was considered the worst ever made for decades because modern audiences view them differently but we would need to give WP:DUE weight to changing opinion. This isn't just a generational issue, Guardians was apparently condemned universally in Russia but critics in other countries went easier on it. It's also a political issue, depending on your stance on feminism you either view I Spit on Your Grave as sexist trash or an empowering story about revenge.LM2000 (talk) 20:16, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Transformers: The Last Knight (2017)

  • Anton Bidel of Sight & Sound called it "an exhausting distillation of everything that can possibly go wrong with a blockbuster".[1]
  • Sarah Knight Adamson of Sarah's Backstage Pass said "No one has the energy or desire to care after suffering through two and half hours of a film that is nothing short of a chaotic mess".[2]
  • Yohana Desta of Vanity Fair called it "a million god-awful movies crammed into one" and went on to explain that "it succeeds only in suturing together the worst aspects of each genre".[3]
  • Julian Lytle of idobi Radio called it "one of the worst movies I've ever seen in a very long time"; at the end of his review he summarised "This movie is the complete worst".[4]
  • Dana Schwartz of Marie Claire said "There never has been a been a worse movie than Transformers: The Last Knight" and went on to say "I spent real, American money to see the worst movie I've ever experienced my entire life".[5]

These could be enough reviews to add Transformers: The Last Knight onto the list.2A00:23C6:272E:6D00:58BC:898E:DCED:A483 (talk) 16:54, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Need a lot more evidence and impact than these reviews to make it the worst. Espngeek (talk) 20:25, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Cuties

Given the massive backlash the film received, I feel like the film Cuties (2020) should be listed here. In my lifetime I have never seen a movie so hated, not even Cats (2019 film). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8803:8600:42C:7CB5:983F:3E3E:2EA7 (talk) 21:13, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

It has an 87% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes, so it's far from being one of the worst movies. What you're looking for is a list of controversial movies. DonQuixote (talk) 21:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
But "hated" is not the same as "worst". This talk page has had many a discussion about the difference. "Little Man" is another good example. Hated, and badly reviewed, but not enough to cross the line into "worst". "Cuties" received controversy over its cover art, rather than its artistic merit. doktorb wordsdeeds 09:33, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Samurai Cop

In the page of the film Samurai Cop there's a link that directs to this list. However, the proper film isn't listed anywhere.

I should be either added into the list or the reference removed from the original page (until the film is added).

190.237.114.153 (talk) 18:53, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

The mentions of this list should be removed from the Samurai Cop article, and any other article that isn't actually on this list. The Samurai Cop article should not claim it has been "often cited as one of the worst films of all time" without providing any citations. It's bad enough to claim something "has been cited as" but to claim "often" without even providing one citation is irresponsible (or worse). I've removed the unsourced claims from that article, but other editors may need to check and remove them again. It seems some people claim the film is "so bad it's good", and it does not seems to be widely known (barely any reviews) so it might not be terrible enough to ever justify being included on this list. The first step though is to improve the Samurai Cop article and provide quality sources that clearly call it the worst ever. -- 109.76.203.103 (talk) 12:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Re-adding Mortal Kombat: Annihilation

This film was removed but wasn't given a reason for its removal. It's considered the worst video game movie of all time, second only to Alone in the Dark[6] and has been mocked for awful dialogue, laughable special effects and costumes even for 1997, so-bad-its-good acting and mindless fight scenes[7] but it says to ask on the talk page before re-adding a film so I'd like some input on the decision.

  1. ^ https://www2.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/sight-sound-magazine/reviews-recommendations/transformers-last-knight-review
  2. ^ https://www.sarahsbackstagepass.com/transformers-the-last-knight-pg-13-%e2%98%85/#9733;/
  3. ^ https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/06/transformers-the-last-knight-review
  4. ^ https://idobi.com/review/transformers-the-last-knight-is-the-worst/
  5. ^ https://www.marieclaire.com/culture/news/a27921/transformers-the-last-knight-review/
  6. ^ "44 Video Game Movies Ranked". Rotten Tomatoes.
  7. ^ "Mortal Kombat Annihilation User Reviews". IMDb.
  • This is for the worst films of all time generally, not worst of a genre. It's apparently not even considered the worst video game movie. The winner, Alone in the Dark, is on here though because it meets the general criteria.LM2000 (talk) 23:10, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Star Wars Holiday Special (1978)?

Hey, I was thinking, maybe Star Wars Holiday Special could be added to the list. It was generally found terribly by the audience and Star Wars fans, to the point where it was emitted only once on television while its director, George Lucas, ordered to destroy all VHS tapes in order to prevent it from ever being seen again. TheEditMate (talk) 00:40, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

That's not a film. DonQuixote (talk) 01:56, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
I beg to differ. It's categorized as "tv special" due to character of its release, however according to article Television special, quote, "Specials have been produced which provide a full range of entertainment and informational value available via the television medium (news, drama, comedy, variety, cultural), in various formats (live television, documentary, studio production, animation, film), and in any viewing lengths (short films, feature films, miniseries, telethons).". Holiday Special lasts 99 minutes which, I think, is enough be categorized as television or feature movie (for example 2019 Steven Universe: The Movie television film lats 82 minutes), and if you scroll down the article about the HS, you will see, that it's in the categories such as "Category:1978 films" and "Category:1978 television films".TheEditMate (talk) 12:03, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Theatrical films only; it can be (and is) included on list of television shows considered the worst. Espngeek (talk) 12:08, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Ah, ok, thank you very much TheEditMate (talk) 20:10, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
If you have to say I beg to differ rather than citing a reliable source, then it's probably original research. DonQuixote (talk) 13:21, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
It's just a saying. TheEditMate (talk) 20:10, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
The point is that it's not a citation. DonQuixote (talk) 20:28, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

It's clearly not a film. 51.52.43.171 (talk) 15:58, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

The Emoji Movie?

Why has commercial tripe like this been removed from this list, yet brave failures like 'Heavens Gate' are still included? Getting fed up of 'admin' locking pages and stifling freedom of speech on Wiki 51.52.43.171 (talk) 15:57, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a place to showcase how well you can cite and summarize reliable sources. So if you can provide some sources, then that would be great. DonQuixote (talk) 17:18, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
This list is supposed to summarize movies which reliable sources have called the worst movies of all time. It is not based on any individual editor's opinion on what is "tripe". You may also want to read this essay on freedom of speech on Wikipedia. CodeTalker (talk) 17:22, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
I have tried searching for "Emoji Movie" and enough uses of the right terms for this article - "worst ever", "worst film" and so on. I just can't find enough to satisfy the necessary bar for entry on this page. I have been frustrated before about possible entries for this page, but then worked with editors to make the "Cats" paragraph as strong as it is. My advice is to keep working and researching. I got there eventually. Entry to this article is not easy but it can be done! doktorb wordsdeeds 18:25, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Would foreign language sources be applicable? I found two possible sources. One (a Colombian review) describes Emoji Movie as the worst animated film of the century (though this is a local radio station, don't know if reliable). This one is stronger; a Spanish review from El Confidencial calls this the worst animated film of all time. That's definitely a statement. --RoBG97MEX (talk) 05:01, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Foreign sources are fine but they need to say it's the worst movie of all time not just the worst animated movie.LM2000 (talk) 16:37, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Southland Tales

I am starting this discussion, which March Fox should have done after the first time their addition was reverted. The citations offered for this movie do not qualify it to be considered one of the worst of all time.

  • [11] This is an interview with Richard Kelly and does not contain a critical evaluation of the movie at all.
  • [12] Roger Ebert's review of the movie calls it a "mess" but doesn't call it the worst of the year, let alone the worst of all time, and doesn't even use the word "worst".
  • [13] Rotten Tomatoes gives it a critical rating of 39%, far higher than most movies in this article (Battlefield Earth 3%, Freddy Got Fingered 11%, Swept Away 5%, Gigli 6%, Alone in the Dark 1%).
  • [14] This is an interview with Justin Timberlake and does not contain a critical evaluation of the movie.
  • [15] This is another interview with Richard Kelly and not a critical evaluation of the movie.
  • The Jason Solomons cite links to a 404, so I don't know what it actually says.

CodeTalker (talk) 17:53, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Re: Southland Tales

If you have to convince someone that such-and-such a film is one of the worst films rather than directly quoting a reliable source, then it's original research. If you cite sources like [16] which only describes how bad the movie is rather than calling it one of the worst films, then it's synthesis. Seriously, Wikipedia is about citing and summarising reliable sources--it's a glorified term paper (from a certain point of view) with term paper rules. DonQuixote (talk) 17:58, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

The Emoji Movie

So, I went into this article and wondered... Why isn't The Emoji Movie in this article? I mean it's been panned by critics both official (ex. New York Times, The Guardian, IndieWire) and contemporary (ex. Nostalgia Critic, I Hate Everything, etc), has a Rotten Tomatoes score of 7% (LOWER than Cat in the Hat's), and even got four of the five Razzies it was nominated for. It even did worse than the 2003 Cat in the Hat film, which got the title "Worst Excuse for a Movie". --2601:701:C000:2FF0:8DEE:46FF:E386:A0BB (talk) 17:50, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

From the notice
Attention editors
Please note, this list is not subject to personal opinion! Before inserting a movie, please make sure that it has actually been defined "the worst" by reputable sources.
DonQuixote (talk) 17:59, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I hardly call the global disdain for the movie "personal opinion." --2601:701:C000:2FF0:34DC:8C48:1E97:438D (talk) 00:04, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

  • The Emoji Movie has been nominated almost every other month, sometimes every other week, and it has always been rejected. This article is perhaps the best example of gatekeeping on Wikipedia, for good and for ill. A result of that gatekeeping means that we all have to accept that some films will never, ever, make it to the article. I think that it's clear from most of the discussions had before that the article will never, ever, include The Emoji Movie. It's quite simple, really. doktorb wordsdeeds 01:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
I hardly call the global disdain for the movie "personal opinion."
It would be better if you would cite a reliable source that can verify that rather than trying to convince everyone that it's true. DonQuixote (talk) 02:19, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

RE: defined "the worst"by reputable sources

@Espngeek: Per the note on the edit page 'Before inserting a movie, please make sure that it has actually been defined "the worst" by reputable sources.' That is to say the sources have to literally say something like "one of the worst movies of all time"--and per due weight, it's got to be more than one source saying it. Of the sources you provided in your current edits, only one source names one of the movies that you tried to add as one of the worst movies (the Empire source for Son of the Mask). You need to proved multiple sources (probably at least five) specifically stating that move X is one of the worst movies ever made. DonQuixote (talk) 20:38, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Please review edits by User:Inhighspeed

The recent edits by User:Inhighspeed need to be reviewed and possibly reverted, because this user changed the word order of quoted text[17] and that needs to be reverted. The other edits might acceptable but for someone to deliberately or even accidentally get quoted text wrong makes it necessary to treat their other edits with an abundance of caution. I hope someone will review and revert those changes as needed. -- 109.79.167.172 (talk) 00:28, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Seems fine. Although it did shine a light on efilmcritic.com which doesn't seem to be that reputable per their FAQ.
4. How do I become a reviewer?
Click here. Submit your review, on any film you like, and we'll take a look at it. If we think your review is funny enough, or intelligent enough (preferably both) then you'll be contacted by mail with your account login and password - meaning you can review anything, anytime, with our automated system.
I'ved removed all citations to efilmcritic.
Also, this list probably needs to be reviewed and trimmed. DonQuixote (talk) 00:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you.
I can't say eFilmCritic is top of my list but they're listed by Rotten Tomatoes and when it comes to minor video releases they are often among the very few sources available. For a list like this that is trying to be rigourous and definitive better sources should be available.
As for trimming this list: I'm skeptical about forgettably awful films versus enduringly worst ever films, and although people love to hate Sandler I think that only "Jack and Jill" stands the test of time in sheer awfulness but Bucky Larson deserves only obscurity. I still think Dirty Grandpa is a terrible film and it is awful to see DeNiro make terrible comedies but it wasn't even the worst of that year and hardly belongs here. Time will tell. -- 109.79.167.172 (talk) 01:28, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
I undid this edit as whitewashing — they scrubbed references to gay that they deemed homophobic. The first mention, at least, is important to the synopsis. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:32, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Suggestion: To Boldly Flee

Doug Walker can't make movies for shit. Scenes are either characters standing around and talking, piss-poor CGI, or line-for-line ¨Parodies" of Star Wars. The production was an absolute Talladega Turd Tornado. Most importantly, the jokes aren't funny. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.236.22.11 (talk • contribs)

From the top of this talk page
  • Ensure that it is widely considered one of the worst films by a broad spectrum of both casual and professional film critics. There are hundreds of "bad" or even "crappy" films, this page is for the worst.
  • Cite at least one of those sources (Preferably the most reliable one(s)) that explicitly calls it "one of the worst films ever"
DonQuixote (talk) 22:13, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Films I believe should be added to the list

To whoever is reading this, here are some films I believe should be added to this list. This includes the following:

Thank you for your time, and I hope these will be added to the list soon. Best, Kim Jong Dos (talk) 18:43, 18 September 2021 (UTC)AnonymousKim Jong Dos (talk) 18:43, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Fine reliable sources calling these one of the worst films of all time and they can be added. LoneWolf1992 (user talk) 19:53, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Many of those have been suggested before. Please note list of films removed from this article. Most of the films suggested are undeniably bad, many of them are worse, maybe one or two of them might even have been the worst film that year but this list is intended to be limited to only the very worst ever. Worst of the year is not enough, you need to show reliable sources that call the film the "worst ever". -- 109.79.177.13 (talk) 16:41, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Halloween The Curse of Michael Myers

Has a 9 on rotten tomatoes, 10 on Metacritic, and is critically panned by multiple movies sites.JYmasktape (talk) 23:17, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

From the top of the talk page
  • Ensure that it is widely considered one of the worst films by a broad spectrum of both casual and professional film critics. There are hundreds of "bad" or even "crappy" films, this page is for the worst.
  • Cite at least one of those sources (Preferably the most reliable one(s)) that explicitly calls it "one of the worst films ever"
DonQuixote (talk) 23:56, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

--14.8.68.2 (talk) 04:45, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Films to remove

The criteria listed at the top of this page instructs us that films need to be described as "one of the worst films ever" in order to be included here. Being described as the worst of its genre (i.e. "worst horror movie", "worst movie sequel", "worst swashbuckling movie", etc.) isn't enough. Some sources list Caddyshack II as the worst sequel but I'm not seeing anything that describe it the worst of all time beyond that. Thoughts?LM2000 (talk) 08:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Titanic: The Legend Goes On

This movie has been added and removed a few times, almost always by long-term vandal/sockpuppet Giovannigiulio, who has spent years trimming bad reviews and adding good ones from unreliable sources (which usually claimed that the Italian version was good). With him supposedly inactive, I'll propose it again:

  • Total Film said it's "officially the worst movie ever made". It came in first place in their worst film list that we cite numerous times in this article.[18]
  • Tim Brayton is a Rotten Tomatoes-approved critic (considered reliable per WP:RSP). We cite him twice in this article and other reviews appear throughout the encyclopedia. He says: "It is one of the most surreally bad films I have ever encountered, the kind of thing that your brain refuses to acknowledge exists even as you're watching it. For sheer mesmerising grotesqueness, there's almost nothing I can name that beats it, and no fan of bad movies can say that their life is complete till they've been exposed to it."[19]
  • Total Film also listed it as one of the worst kids movies of all time and described it as "widely considered one of the worst animated films ever made"[20]
  • Showbiz Cheat Sheet list it as the worst animated movie ever, with author Will Roberts commenting that "[any] list of the worst animated films of all time begins with ... Titanic: The Legend Goes On".[21]
  • Screen Rant also included it on a list of the twelve worst animated films of all time[22]

Is anybody opposed to including it this time?LM2000 (talk) 10:18, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

  • I've added it since it has been almost a week and nobody has opposed.LM2000 (talk) 09:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Devilman (2004)

I felt this article lacked Japanese movies, so I did some research into films that were heavily criticized by the Japanese film press. The lack of information in English is probably the reason why these films are little known outside of Japan. After my research I believe the best candidate for this list is Devil Man (2004) directed by Hiroyuki Nasu which was widely and publicly criticized on it's release. It was only after I finished researching reviews from 2004 to 2019 that I realized that Devilman has already been considered for this list. Is it the lack of English sources that prevent it from being included? I will include the information I translated about Devilman here.

Devilman デビルマン 2004

Bunshun Raspberry 1st place

Snake Strawberry Awards 1st place

A live-action film adaptation of Go Nagai's manga Devilman with a budget of 1 billion yen but only made 520 million at the box office. Takeshi Kitano called it one of the 4 worst Japanese movies ever and said "There is nothing better than getting drunk and watching this movie." Many of the celebrity filled main cast admitted they had no acting experience or were acting in a film for the first time. Due to trying to force the whole story into a short run time, the plot was criticized for making little to no sense. The cameo appearances of celebrities such as Sachiko Kobayashi, Bob Sapp, and Konishiki had "no meaning at all, and only reduced the tension of the story." At the Tokyo Sports Film Awards Sachiko Kobayashi said she was suddenly called to the set to appear in the movie before she even knew what it was. The design of Silene on the poster was completely different to her appearance in the movie. The action scene and CGI were also heavily ridiculed. The director Hiroyuki Nasu began his directing career as pornography director for Nikkatsu Roman Porno. Sadly he died about 5 months after Devilman's release at the age of 53 due to liver cancer.

There are 4 major award lists that I could find. All of these awards/magazines have extensive pages on the Japanese Wikipedia. However they are all "worst of the year" type lists, which is probably why Devilman has not been included. I propose we try to find some sources that accuse Devilman of being a "worst of all time" film. How many sources are necessary?

文春きいちご賞 Bunshun Raspberry Award (published from 2004-2007). It's title references the Razzies.

蛇いちご賞 Snake Strawberry Award for Sports News スポーツ報知 (published from 2004-2011). It's title is also a reference to the Razzies.

HIHOはくさい映画賞- HIHO Cabbage Film Awards from the magazine " Hidden Treasure Movies" 映画秘宝 (published from 2007-2019)

映画芸術 Film Arts magazine award (published from 2007-2019)

--14.8.68.2 (talk) 04:11, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

From the top of the talk page
  • Ensure that it is widely considered one of the worst films by a broad spectrum of both casual and professional film critics. There are hundreds of "bad" or even "crappy" films, this page is for the worst.
  • Cite at least one of those sources (Preferably the most reliable one(s)) that explicitly calls it "one of the worst films ever"
Razzies or its equivalents aren't enough by themselves. DonQuixote (talk) 04:15, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Critic Hiroshi Yamamoto created a whole separate part on his website to collect bad reviews of the movie. It links to several national newspapers that panned the movie as well as links to about 100 blog entries from various critics denouncing the movie. Many of these links are now dead, but looking them up via the internet archieve would be possible I think. http://kokorohaitsumo15sai.la.coocan.jp/devilmanlink.htm

Ain't It Cool News published an English review of the film. While the review never explicitly states "it's one of the worst films ever" it says it more literally with quotes such as “It's better to poking your eyes out with your bare hands than to watch this crap. NEVER SEE IT, if you want to live.” http://legacy.aintitcool.com/node/18273

Here is the link to the awards show in which Takeshi Kitano called it “one of the four most stupid movies of all time.” https://web.archive.org/web/20051204035827/http://www.tokyo-sports.co.jp/tsmp/movieparty.htm

It’s rare to see a movie this widely condemned by the Japanese press. --14.8.68.2 (talk) 04:45, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

"Panning" the movie is not the same as calling it "the worst film ever". If you can get two or three reputable sources that explicitly calls it "one of the worst films ever" (or words to that effect), then that'll be great. DonQuixote (talk) 04:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Sadly I don't think it will be possible to find such sources. Part of the problem is a difference of how things are expressed in language. The Japanese rarely say "this is the worst X ever", it's clearly an expression more popular in English. This probably explains the total lack of Japanese films on this page. I'll add the information I found to the Devilman film page and give up trying to get it on this page. I apologize for any inconvenience caused. --14.8.68.2 (talk) 05:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Have you run into any "worst ever" lists in your search of Japanese sources? Some foreign language films on this list were able to be included because of their placement at the top of such lists. If you can't find anything for Devilman, consider searching for sources about Invasion of the Neptune Men, which is a Japanese film that is pretty infamous for its bad reception.LM2000 (talk) 08:00, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
I am looking for lists that use the phrase 最低の映画 (the lowest films) as that is a more natural way to say it in Japanese. However I have not found any reputable sources so far. I looked into Invasion of the Neptune Men, but it seems that its bad reputation is only in the west. For example it's Japanese Wikipedia page makes no mention of it's poor quality. Although it does seem to be a cult film amongst Japanese film fans.　For reference here are two lists of films that the Japanese tend to consider to be the worst, Devilman is on both of them https://eigahitottobi.com/article/67488/#14_DEVILMAN https://movieaddict-blog.org/matome/dasaku-movie-japan/ Thanks for your input, I'll keep looking.14.8.68.2 (talk) 03:21, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure about the reputation of the first link, but the second link seems to be a blog and not usable as a source. DonQuixote (talk) 14:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Emoji Movie?

When did you recently add animated films? Two of them in fact. If you’re gonna do this, why isn’t the emoji movie here? Kramirez0113 (talk) 23:35, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

From the top of the talk page
  • Ensure that it is widely considered one of the worst films by a broad spectrum of both casual and professional film critics. There are hundreds of "bad" or even "crappy" films, this page is for the worst.
  • Cite at least one of those sources (Preferably the most reliable one(s)) that explicitly calls it '"one of the worst films ever"
DonQuixote (talk) 03:44, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Space Jam: A New Legacy

Does Space Jam: A New Legacy meet the criteria for this page? It has received negative critical reviews and even won a few Razzies.--24.44.76.188 (talk) 01:47, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

From the top of the talk page
  • Ensure that it is widely considered one of the worst films by a broad spectrum of both casual and professional film critics. There are hundreds of "bad" or even "crappy" films, this page is for the worst.
  • Cite at least one of those sources (Preferably the most reliable one(s)) that explicitly calls it '"one of the worst films ever"
DonQuixote (talk) 01:53, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Morbius

I'm going to add discussion over adding this year's Jared Leto starring Morbius, since many reviewers and fans are already saying it gave Batman & Robin a run for its money as "worst Superhero film ever".

I think if it wins the Razzies it should be added. Colliric (talk) 13:25, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

From the top of the talk page
  • Ensure that it is widely considered one of the worst films by a broad spectrum of both casual and professional film critics. There are hundreds of "bad" or even "crappy" films, this page is for the worst.
  • Cite at least one of those sources (Preferably the most reliable one(s)) that explicitly calls it '"one of the worst films ever"
DonQuixote (talk) 14:09, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

"One of the worst" vs. "the worst"

I'm a bit confused by the criteria laid out for this list at the top of the talk page. It says that any film on this list should be considered one of the worst films ever by critics and that sources should also explicitly refer to it as such. However, shouldn't this list be dedicated solely to films that have been called the worst, per the title of the list? If we're only going by a movie being called "one of the worst", then the list should instead be titled "List of films considered among the worst". The lead also states that the movies on the list are considered "among the worst", not simply considered the worst. benǝʇᴉɯ 01:25, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

The criteria is loose enough to be interpreted either way. I personally only add films to the list that have at least one source explicitly calling it the worst (or some equivalent), with a wider range of sources calling it "one of the worst" to support its inclusion. Others are more comfortable with including a film if it's simply called "one of the worst", but it should still be considered such by a wide range of sources.LM2000 (talk) 08:14, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, as I explained in my reply below, I don't think every source has to consider an entry on the list the worst, but I think that if every source is just calling it "one of the worst" or "among the worst", then it doesn't really deserve a spot on the list because it isn't considered the worst. benǝʇᴉɯ 17:27, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
"Among" is an unnecessary modifier when the subject is plural. That is, "List of films considered the worst" and "List of films considered among the worst" mean the same thing compared to "A film considered the worst" vs "A film considered among the worst" which is what you're probably thinking of. DonQuixote (talk) 14:46, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
"List of films considered the worst" would imply that each individual film on the list has been deemed the worst by someone (or, in the case of this list, by a wide variety of critics and sources), whereas "List of films considered among the worst" suggests that the films on the list are considered among the worst films, but that films that have been called the worst might not even be on the list. A quote used in this very article uses "among" to refer to multiple films: Howard the Duck, Gigli, Showgirls, From Justin to Kelly. What do they all have in common? They're all widely considered among the worst big studio movies ever made. The implication here is vastly different from saying that they're all considered the worst movies ever made, hence the following sentences (You know what else they have in common? They're all better than Jack and Jill.), because it suggests that those films might be some of the worst, but that there are other films in the "worst" category that are potentially even worse than them.
What I take issue with isn't the title of the article, though, but the fact that that title contradicts the verbiage used in the criteria and the lead. Saying a movie is the worst is a far cry from saying it's one of the worst or among the worst, because "one of the worst" could be out of a list of hundreds or thousands of the "worst" films, whereas critics saying a film is the worst leaves no doubt about its placement on that list. I don't think every source referring to an entry on the list has to call it the worst, but I think that, if every review or retrospective on it merely calls it "one of the worst" or says it's "among the worst", which is the case for many of the films on the list, then it's not considered "the worst". benǝʇᴉɯ 17:24, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Seriously, when the subject is plural, "the worst" and "among the worst" are the same things, especially when it's a group such as a list. Each individual item in the list is "among" other items considered the worst whilst the list itself is a "list of the worst". That is, the list is a "list of films considered the worst" and at the same time the list is composed of "films considered among the worst" since they're in the list. It's a peculiarity of the English language. DonQuixote (talk) 17:34, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
The thing about this list, though, is that it is not a ranked list of which movies are the worst in order. It uses lists like that in it, but the whole point of the list (or at least what should be the point of the list) is that each of these movies is separately considered the worst by separate critics. I think my reply adequately explained why this makes the title confusing, since a list of movies considered "among the worst" by critics could potentially not include any movie that is considered "the worst" by any of them, whereas a list of movies "considered the worst" would include movies all specifically deemed "the worst" by different critics or sources.
I'm honestly only concerned about the title as it pertains to the criteria for this list, though, since plenty of films on here have seemingly only ever been called "among the worst" or "one of the worst", and never just flat-out "the worst", which seems contradictory to the function of the list. I'd like to hear your thoughts on that. benǝʇᴉɯ 18:19, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
The title is fine. Most people will understand the context because it's a common turn of phrase: the worst films, the best films, the worst restaurants, the best cars, etc. Not many people will be that nitpicky. DonQuixote (talk) 20:10, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
I am not asking about the title, I'm asking about the criteria for the list. benǝʇᴉɯ 20:20, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
The criteria is that you can quote multiple reliable sources stating something like "it's the worst film ever" or it's "one of the worst films ever". DonQuixote (talk) 23:18, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware. But I'm saying that, if the list is chronicling films that various critics have called the worst, then it doesn't make sense that the criteria only requires films to be called "one of the worst" because it goes against the purpose of the list. I'm wondering if you agree. benǝʇᴉɯ 02:46, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
This list is chronicling the set of films considered the worst--that is, each film is considered one of the worst films ever made. Seriously, it's basic English. DonQuixote (talk) 03:21, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Is Häxan (1922) a Danish movie?

The spelling indicates that it is Swedish. 178.19.206.80 (talk) 18:38, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

It was apparently filmed in Denmark but produced by a Swedish company. I just removed the description altogether since Maniac is the topic of that entry and it's largely irrelevant.LM2000 (talk) 10:16, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Should the criteria for this list change its wording from "one of the worst" to just "the worst"?

I asked about this in an above topic, but I wanted to open it up to a discussion. Should we:

  • Change the current wording for the criteria, which states that a film must be "widely considered one of the worst films by a broad spectrum of both casual and professional film critics" and must explicitly be called "one of the worst films ever", to saying that it must be "considered the worst film ever by several (subject to change) film critics" and must explicitly be called "the worst film ever", or...
  • Keep the current wording?

I explained above why I think the wording should be changed, but just to reiterate: it makes no sense to have a list consisting of movies considered the worst if the entries on that list are only being referred to as being "among the worst" or "one of the worst". Each individual film on the list should have at least one or two critics calling it the worst. As it is, the list is a bit hard to navigate since there are so many movies on it, and I think part of the reason for that is that the criteria simply aren't strict enough. Plenty of movies get called "among the worst", hence why there are so many "worst movies of all time" lists and why this list is so long, but not nearly as many are confidently referred to by critics as "the worst movie of all time". benǝʇᴉɯ 02:57, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

  • Keep: Wording is fine. This is a list of the worst films ever made, and as such each and every one of the films can be described as "one of" or "among" the worst films ever. DonQuixote (talk) 03:29, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment I do think the criteria needs to be refined a bit but I think the issue is with the second bullet, which says: "Cite at least one of those sources (Preferably the most reliable one(s)) that explicitly calls it "one of the worst films ever"". Only reliable sources should be considered in the first place and it needs to take more than one to satisfy the first bullet, which says that it needs to be widely considered one of the worst films by a broad spectrum of both casual and professional film critics. We're at the point where dozens of reliable sources have "worst ever" lists, it should take more than placement on those for a film to get included otherwise we're going to end up with an unmanageable list.LM2000 (talk) 09:59, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
    That should probably read Preferably the most prominent one(s). DonQuixote (talk) 11:32, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Alien Beasts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAcNpW2nmYU — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottandrewhutchins (talk • contribs)

Not notable per WP:RSPYT. DonQuixote (talk) 21:40, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Nostalgia Critic

Crummymummy, Espngeek. We have not used Nostalgia Critic as a source in the past because he's not a reliable source. He portrays a satirical character and exaggerates in his reviews. Discussions on this talk page regarding his unreliability go back to at least 2010, well before the scandal. The source used for The Garbage Pail Kids Movie is an out of character interview, which is a little stronger, but would be more solid if a third party source can be provided. However, Nostalgia Critic should not belong in the lede of this article. LM2000 (talk) 07:58, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_films_considered_the_worst/Archive_14&oldid=1164973092"