Talk:List of films considered the worst/Removed films

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Reasons for removal[edit]

The below movies were removed for one or more of the following reasons.

Lacking in citations[edit]

Following up a little on the above, now that we are keeping the article. First I don't understand the "title is POV" suggests. The title, on the contrary, bends over backwards to be NPOV. In line with what I did at List of movies that have been considered the greatest ever, I am going to remove all movies that do not have a citation for being worst movie, otherwise it is just a collection of our own POVs. All films removed will be listed here, and once we have a cite, we can move it back to the article. Pcb21| Pete 14:10, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Popular and/or succesful movies removed from the list[edit]

The following are a list of movies removed from this list that were succesful financially and/or critically, thus negating most bad reviews/scores that would otherwise make them list-worthy. Despite the ability to find negative reviews, if a movie's a success by any definition of the word, then it disqualifies them from the list with rare exceptions. Pearl Harbor, despite personal opinions and real criticism is still a very successful movie when it comes to earnings.

The 50 Worst Movies of All Time DVD - Films removed whose main or only citation is being on this DVD[edit]

Is simply 'being on a "50 Worst" list really a valid reason for movie to be listed on this page? I also have long held that simply being somewhere on the IMDB Bottom 100 is not particularly notable. (It's got to be better than that. At least the bottom 10 or something. Ideally, having held the very bottom spot at some time.) Here are a few that I have removed because that's their only citation (excepting equally vague references):

Is Wikipedia selling this DVD, and will buying it support Wikipedia? If not, how come its title appears 20 times throughout this list? I understand the need to cite sources, but this seems uncomfortably close to spam to me, especially for such a recent product. At least there's no affiliate link, but maybe it could be moved to a footnote or something?'
You have an interesting point. Perhaps we could make footnotes or abbreviations which refer to a reference section, since we keep referring to the same half-dozen or so sources repeatedly. Gamaliel 4 July 2005 19:14 (UTC)
I think this is one of the worst documentaries ever made. It's padded with some lame computer animation that gets old after the first few times it shows it (it shows it fifty times), and the films are mostly illustrated with trailers that fail to support the points that the narrator is making. His justifications for inclusion, such as Kobler's Snow White being "just too weird", make his opinions laughable unnotable. --Scottandrewhutchins 13:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I removed all references to this pseudo-documentary.--Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 18:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Special cases[edit]

Some directors and (to a lesser extent) actors are widely reviled or mocked for their output; any movie directed by them can be argued to be among the worst ever. A few examples:

  • Any movie starring John Agar from roughly 1950 to 1970 is often considered awful; in particular, his collaborations with Larry Buchanan are argued by some to be particularly awful.
  • Larry Buchanan made a series of TV movies that are considered by those who have seen them to be unusually bad, even for the syndicated TV movie market.
  • Ed Wood's productions were generally shot in one take, and featured dialog that is widely considered among the silliest of the era.

Alphabetical list of removed movies[edit]

Before removing movies from the list and putting them on the main page, please discuss it here first, or it is very likely to be reverted.


  • The Adventures of Pluto Nash (2002): A science-fiction comedy set in the year 2080, starring Eddie Murphy as Pluto Nash, a retired smuggler, who travels across the moon to discover who is responsible for the arson of his nightclub, the film also stars Randy Quaid as an android, Rosario Dawson as a naive singer just arrived on the moon, Jay Mohr as an old-fashioned lounge singer, and Pam Grier as Pluto's mother. The film is considered one of the biggest box office flops, with a £100 million budget, costing $20 million in marketing, and grossing only around $7.1 million, and it is panned by critics and audiences alike. Most of the negative opinions of the movie are based on the acting and dialogue, its lack of humor and the crude special effects. Pluto Nash was nominated for five Golden Raspberry Awards in 2003, including Worst Picture, Worst Actor for Murphy, Worst Director for Ron Underwood, Worst Screenplay and Worst Screen Couple for Murphy and "himself cloned", it did not win any of the Razzies awards, it also lost to Gigli in 2005 at the 25th Golden Raspberry Awards for Worst Comedy of Our First 25 Years.
More notable for being a commercial flop than for its poor reception, so far no citations have been provided to prove it is considered to be among the worst. LM2000 (talk) 23:45, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Alexander (2004): Hyped as one of the serious Oscar contenders of 2004, Oliver Stone's epic on Alexander the Great was both a critical and financial disaster. The film recieved a 15% on Rotten Tomatoes [3] and made just $34 million by January 30, 2005, rounding to about $116 million short of it's $150 million budget. [4]. It ended up being nominated for six Razzies (It "won" nothing) and landed Roger Ebert's number one pick for the worst movie of 2004 (Tied with Troy). Two general criticisms of the film were both Colin Farrell looking ridiculous with bleached-blonde hair and overall being way too long (In August 2005, an eight-minute shorter Director's Cut was released on DVD). Some critics noted:
"So misconceived, so shrill, so fetishy is Oliver Stone's epic, so unintentionally hilarious a stew of paganism and Freudianism, that it makes Conan the Barbarian look like Gladiator." --Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer
"A lunk-headed train wreck that looks like a tag sale in a 323 B.C. supermarket in old Peking." --Rex Reed, New York Observer
Repeating what I said in the edit summary: nothing more than critical quotes lifted directly from not-quite-'worst-worthy' RT score and citing low box office. Only 1 worst list and didn't even 'win' Razzies Dannybu2001 22:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Alex l'Ariete (2000): The first foray into an acting career by the former ski champion Alberto Tomba, this movie ended his days as an actor, due to his extremely poor performance, often not even speaking intelligibly. Former model and costar Michelle Hunziker joked about the poor box office performance, saying that the movie was seen only by her, her granny and her auntie. Actor Massimo Poggio defined it "one of the least seen film[s] in the history of the movies.". The film budget was about 3 million euros, while it grossed less than 2000 euros and with just 285 viewers most theaters stopped screening this movie after a few days. L'Unità journalist Luca Bottura wrote that the movie "made the Lumière brothers regret having invented the cinematograph." Tomba was nominated as worst actor in many contests and won the Cinepernacchia.
  • Alien Beasts (1991): A film by Carl J. Sukenick, who repeats most of his dialogue, smokes pot through much of the filming, and uses only one shot of the title creature, a still photograph, for length periods, sometimes flipping it, in addition to endless master shots of repetitive fights scenes in which the cast can be heard laughing.[1]
Bad, but no assertion of being considered the worst ever: there are lots of bad shot-on-video movies in the world. Mark Grant 08:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • A*P*E (1976): An American/South Korean co-production directed by Paul Leder made to cash-in on the success of Dino De Laurentiis' 1976 remake of King Kong. The film was released in 3-D and has also gone by the titles of Hideous Mutant and Attack of the Giant Horny Gorilla.[2] The film has been widely panned, with the titular monster (In an infamous scene where he flips off a helicopter) even appearing on the cover of The Official Razzie Movie Guide. The special effects are among the most panned aspects of the film. John Wilson claims that the ape suit used in the film "looks more like your grandmother's lamb's wool coat collar than an actual simian." He also remarks that "a five-year old could spot the [model buildings and vehicles] as phony."[3] Other critics have noted that the size of the monster appears to change throughout the film, and that the ape actor's t-shirt can be seen through holes in his costume.[4] Monster movie critic Mike Bogue states that "A*P*E may not be the worst giant monster movie ever made, but it would have to chart high on any Top Ten Worst list." Citing such things as the ape vomiting and the ape dancing to the film score, Bogue states that "as the genre magazine Castle of Frankenstein used to say in its movie reviews, this one is so bad it has to be seen to be disbelieved."[5]
But did anybody ever call it the worst ever? LM2000 (talk) 23:47, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
  • An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn (1998): A 1998 comedy about a film that was so poorly received that its own director wanted his name removed from it. In the film, Eric Idle's character is named Alan Smithee, but since replacing his name with what was then the only Directors Guild of America-approved pseudonym for directors who wanted their names removed from credits, Alan Smithee, is a logical impossibility, he destroys all copies of the movie. Also featuring cameos by Jackie Chan, Oscar winner Whoopi Goldberg, and Oscar-nominated actors Ryan O'Neal and Sylvester Stallone, this film was widely panned by critics upon its release. It won five Razzies, including Worst Picture. With an estimated budget of $10 million, Burn Hollywood Burn only grossed approximately $52,850, since it was released in only 19 theaters,[6] making it a tremendous box office flop. Roger Ebert gave the film a zero out of four stars, calling it a "spectacularly bad film—incompetent, unfunny, ill-conceived, badly executed, lamely written, and acted by people who look trapped in the headlights."[7] It is also on his "most hated" list.[8] In the documentary Directed by Alan Smithee, director Arthur Hiller stated he had his credit replaced with the pseudonym Alan Smithee because he was so appalled with the botched final cut by the film's producers.[9] It was written by Joe Eszterhas and at one point in the movie a character comments that the film-within-the-film was "worse than Showgirls," which was also written by Eszterhas. Even with its hostile critical reception and commercial failure, An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn did have one positive effect: It was perhaps the most widely known of several films which confronted the "Alan Smithee" issue that finally forced the Directors Guild of America to broaden the list of approved false names for directors who wished their actual names removed from motion picture and/or television credits.
  • People who think that Attack of the Killer Tomatoes is one of the worst movies ever are unaware of the fact that it is a comedy. (Ibaranoff24 00:26, 12 February 2006 (UTC))


  • Barb Wire (1996): The film was an adaptation of the Dark Horse comic book, and was both a critical and financial flop. In her first first starring role, Pamela Anderson promoted the movie at the Cannes Film Festival, but later regretted this movie as a bad choice. Siskel and Ebert gave it "Two Thumbs Down," criticizing the film's poor acting, boring script and elements borrowing heavily from Casablanca.[10] At the 17th Golden Raspberry Awards, the film was nominated for six Razzies (including Anderson's "Impressive Enhancements" as Worst Screen Couple), and Anderson went home with the Worst New Star award.[11]
    • Someone removed this from the list again, but since this has been removed from the list before, I don't think it should be re-added until some additional references are provided. It currently has a 30% rating at Rotten Tomatoes, which is much higher than most of the movies on the list. Fortdj33 (talk) 21:03, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Barney's Great Adventure (1998): This movie was adapted based on the children's television series that aired on PBS Kids titled: Barney & Friends, This film was written by Stephen White and directed by Steve Gomer. The film received poor reviews from film critics, and was nominated for 2 Golden Raspberry Awards, due to the negative criticism of the show and putting up Anti-Barney humor and several people becoming Anti-Barney fans across the United States back in the early 90s before the film was made. Critics have been criticizing it for: "being inappropriate for everyone of all ages". It is on #42 on imdb's Bottom 100 with a rating of a 2.1 out of 10.0. The film was mostly criticized for its poor plot, poor storyline, and poor acting. The 2 Golden Raspberry Awards that the movie was nominated for, was for worst guest star and worst original song.
    • Removed because the movie Movie has a 23% rating at Rotten Tomatoes, and the IMDb rating does not have enough votes to make the Bottom 100. Just not notable enough. Fortdj33 (talk) 17:08, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Beverly Hills Cop III (1994): Eddie Murphy phones in a half-hearted effort to extend a franchise that arguably shouldn't have even had one sequel, much less two. The film is notable for its sheer boredom factor: at 1 hour, 45 minutes, critics agreed that it could have been cut at least in half without losing any plot. Most experts also feel that the film marked the beginning of the end for Murphy's film career; he would go on to such duds as Vampire in Brooklyn, Metro, Holy Man, sequels to both The Nutty Professor and Dr. Dolittle, a ghastly I Spy remake, and the inexcusable The Adventures of Pluto Nash. As for Beverly Hills Cop III, it amassed a very low 8% at Rotten Tomatoes and was nominated for two Razzies.
A close one, but worst Hollywood film isn't enough, we need a source calling it the worst in all of cinema. LM2000 (talk) 19:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Blank Check (1993) (Not to be confused with the 1970s game show of the same name): A Disney family film that got unusually bad reviews for its type. It is still sold on DVD at many Toys 'R' Us locations.
  • Blood Feast (1963): Pioneering, if not the first film in the "gore" genre. Called worst movie of the year by Time magazine, but it has accumulated a very sizable cult over the years.
  • Bloodrayne (2005): Rounding out director Uwe Boll's video game-to-movie adaptations, Bloodrayne debuted in late 2005, grossing just over $3.5 million worldwide by June of 2006. The film was cited by both critics and audiences as having the same inane dialogue, poor pacing, and dullness that had plagued House of the Dead and Alone in the Dark. BloodRayne has received poor reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, with an overall rating of only 4%.It was ranked 48th in Rotten Tomatoes's 100 worst reviewed films of the 2000s.[19] Metacritic gave the film a score of 18% based on 13 reviews, summarizing the reviews as "overwhelming dislike."[20] Critics ridiculed Boll for hiring actual prostitutes instead of actors for a scene featuring Meat Loaf in order to save on production costs. They were allegedly only paid €150. The film has ranked as low as number 53 on IMDb's Bottom 100 list, although as of December 2007, this movie is no longer on the list. It was nominated for six Golden Raspberry Awards, including Worst Picture, Worst Actress (Kristanna Loken), Worst Supporting Actor (Ben Kingsley), Worst Supporting Actress (Michelle Rodriguez), Worst Director, and Worst Screenplay. Actor (Michael Madsen) even said in several interviews that he disliked the movie very much.
  • Bolero (1984): The Razzie winner for the worst movie of 1984, this film finds Bo Derek (Razzie winner of 1984) searching the world for her ideal lover. The movie is widely criticized as being only good for Derek's nude scenes; some state even those weren't enough for redemption. Roger Ebert gave it one half a star, stating that "There are two Good Parts, not counting her naked ride on horseback, which was the only scene in the movie that had me wondering how she did it. The real future of BOLERO is in home cassette rentals, where your fast forward and instant replay controls will supply the editing job the movie so desperately needs."
  • The Bonfire of the Vanities (1990): Based on Tom Wolfe's novel, the movie was directed by Brian De Palma and starred Tom Hanks in what might be considered one of his worst performances ever. The movie earned horrid reviews from critics and was a box office bomb. Ironically, Julie Salamon's book, The Devil's Candy, which chronicled the making of the film and its disastrous release, was very successful.
    • I am reluctant to have dropped this from the article, but it needs a citation stating it is "the worst" according to some recognized measure. I agree that the film was a big disappointment, but this article is not about disappointments per se, it's about the worst movies ever made. Ellsworth 22:33, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Bratz: The Movie (2007): Based off the controversial toyline, Bratz: The Movie was an enormous critical failiure, as it currently holds a 7% on Rotten Tomatoes.[21] Michael Phillips called the film "the most horrifying of 2007", stating that, while the film seems to promote "releasing what's inside" and "letting your spirit soar high" it's all about clothes and outer beauty. He also claimed that Jon Voight's talent is wasted: "the actor—a good actor; remember?—looks as dazed as he did after being horked up by the snake in Anaconda." Richard Roeper stated that the film was one of the worst films of 2007. It was nominated for several Razzies, including 5 for each actress potraying each girl, but did not win any. Despite the horrendous reviews, the film earned $26,013,153 at the box-office. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:09, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
  • The Brown Bunny (2003): A road movie about a motorcycle racer, actor-director Vincent Gallo, who reunites with his girlfriend. He goes to McDonald's, washes his van, and visits a pet store, but nothing much happens until the notorious final scene where Chloë Sevigny performs unsimulated fellatio on him. A version that ran 118 minutes was shown at the Cannes Film Festival, and was voted by Screen International as the worst movie ever shown there ([5]). A later version cut out 26 minutes, and was given much more positive reviews. Subject of a notorious (if resolved) feud between critic Roger Ebert and Gallo ([6]).
    • I honestly did not feel like The Brown Bunny should be removed from the list. But, as it's written, it needs more 'proof'; especially since the post-film festival version was better received. I would like to see this one re-added merely by reputation (never seen it myself), but as is, it's stretching, and that could be construed as POV. Find some more cites, please! Dannybu2001 18:06, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


  • Cannibal Ferox (1981): Made during the waning days of the "cannibal boom" of the late 70s/early 80s, it is a controversial and infamous exploitation film, notorious for its scenes of extreme gore, real animal killings, and moderate sexual violence. Directed by Umberto Lenzi, it may have been made to copy the success of Ruggero Deodato's Cannibal Holocaust, which featured similar scenes of violence and morality. Even a positive review by the EOFFTV (Encyclopedia of Fantastic Film and Television) still stated:
It is ultimately remembered by exploitation fans for the reasons it was supposed to be remembered by (shocking and overly dramatic scenes of cruelty). It garnishes only a 4.8 at the IMDb.
Sorry, but 4.8 on IMDB is nowhere near enough to count as being considered 'the worst ever'. Mark Grant 00:07, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
  • The Cat in the Hat (2003): Loosely based on the book of the same name by Dr. Seuss, the film had been received negatively due to the high amount of adult themes. It has a 10% "rotten" rating at Rotten Tomatoes[22], holds a 19/100 on Metacritic meaning “overwhelming dislike”, and has recieved eight Razzie nominations, such as Worst Picture, Worst Actor (Mike Myers), Worst Supporting Actor (Alec Baldwin), Worst Supporting Actress (Kelly Preston), Worst Director, Worst Screenplay and Worst Screen Couple (Myers, Thing One and Thing Two), while winning one for Worst Excuse for an Actual Movie.
  • Chaos (2005): A film about two girls who are brutally murdered and raped (not necessarily in that order). Almost every critic has panned it, many pointing out the similarities between it and I've added a rather lengthy summary of the hatred surrounding "Chaos," of which you can get a good idea of here, here, here and here, but I feel that it may need some cleanup (and maybe a bit more information should any develop). If you feel it needs any cleanup or changing, feel free to do it yourself or suggest it or whatever. Sillstaw 01:36, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Chaos needs more cites and some serious trimming before being readded
  • Christmas with the Kranks (2004): This holiday movie was based on the John Grisham book, Skipping Christmas. Tim Allen and Jamie Lee Curtis starred as the title characters, Luther and Nora Krank, who decide to skip Christmas in favor of a Caribbean cruise, much to the chagrin of the neighbors who all usually decorate lavishly. Although it was a commercial success, this movie was a critical flop. At Rotten Tomatoes, it only garnered a 4% rating. [8]. It made Roger Ebert's list of the worst movies of the year, landing at number two, after he gave it only one star in his review and referred to it as "a holiday movie of stunning awfulness." [9]
    • Only made an annual bad list, as far as I can see, has not been mentioned as one of the worst films ever. Fails to cite how it was a pretty big success at the box office. Cvene64 14:55, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Leonard Maltin gave this film a BOMB rating, his lowest rating he can give a film. Anonymous 3:56 pm CST, 2 January 2007
  • Cool as Ice (1991): This vehicle for Vanilla Ice, loosely based on Rebel Without a Cause, is infamous for its awful dialogue, bad acting, and overall clunky and stupid plot. It won Vanilla Ice a Razzie for "Worst New Star". Notorious for the line "Drop that zero and get with the hero!".
  • Cool World (1992): I have absolutely no idea who added this to the article. Currently rates 4.2/10 on IMDb and has a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 4%, which are both well above what has been decided as a standard for inclusion. We're looking for the absolute worst films ever made, which would mean an IMDb rating of 2/10 or lower, ranked in the website's "Bottom 100" and holding a Tomatoes rating of 0%. This isn't even close. Cool World has its fans and its detractors, and the director himself has stated that it wasn't produced the way he had intended it, but there's no evidence that it is considered "the worst ever" other than the opinion of the person who added this to the article (possibly an anon. editor). In any case, its reputation isn't bad enough for it to be placed on this list. Also, the film was included with a sentence that implied that it was a rip-off of Who Framed Roger Rabbit, which it is not, no more than Roger Rabbit is a rip-off of Song of the South. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 23:41, 17 June 2008 (UTC))
  • The Core (2003): A movie about a team that drills to the center of the planet to restart the spin of Earth's core. Intuitor Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics features the movie prominently and claims, "It's the worst physics movie we've ever viewed." [10] - While a mediocre movie, bad physics doesn't make it the worst movie ever
  • The Cotton Club (1984): Critical reception was mixed for the film as a whole. However, if memory serves, Hoskins, Gwynne and the Hines bros. received almost unanimous praise, as did the technical aspects of the film (photography, art direction, costumes). Anyway, I don't see how anyone can put this in a class wih Gigli, Plan 9 and Killer Tomatoes. But de gustibus. Ellsworth (old comment moved here)
  • The Crawling Hand (1959): When an astronaut dies in an explosion in outer space, one of his severed hands is left. It strangles townspeople and possesses the main character named Paul, a nerdy teenager. Burt Reynolds auditioned for the character of Paul and reportedly did such a terrible job acting that he was asked not to return to the set. Alan Hale Jr. appeared in this movie before he did in Gilligan's Island. Appeared in the 2004 DVD documentary The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made and featured on Mystery Science Theater 3000.
  • The Crippled Masters (1982): Simplistic kung fu movie in which an armless man and a legless man become kung fu masters and fight against their evil teacher who maimed them. Appeared in the 2004 DVD documentary, The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made.
I really don't want to remove the entry for this film. The description kind of speaks for itself. However, I'm not sure if apppearing on a 50 Worst list constitutes a viable candidate for "worst ever". Does anyone have a better citation? -Aranel ("Sarah") 01:32, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
Nope, I've removed it. Maybe find some more cite. This ONLY on the Worst 50 DVD citing thing is getting obnoxious. I think films need to been overwhelmingly considered worst, with multiple citations.Dannybu2001 19:31, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


  • Daddy Day Camp (2007): Received 1% approval on Rotten Tomatoes, it was panned by critics for its poor acting and over reliance on Toilet Humour. Former critic Carlyle picked it as his most hated film of 2007, saying in his review "[Daddy Day Camp] was shot and directed by someone who was fucking asleep."
  • Daniel: Der Zauberer (2004): A low-budget film from Germany, starring singer Daniel Küblböck as himself. Küblböck was voted Germany's Most Irritating Personality in 2003, causing the film to be predictably unsuccessful. The title isn't even accurate, as it implies that Küblböck is "Der Zauberer" ("The Sorcerer"), who is actually a different character (played by Ulli Lommel, the writer/director of the film). Went straight to #1 on the IMDb Bottom 100, and remained there for most of 2004.
  • De Zeemeerman (The Mer-Man) (1996): According to 134,000 users of,[23] De Zeemeerman is the worst Dutch movie of all time, scoring #3 in the list of worst movies overall (with National Lampoon's Pledge This! in the number one spot). De Zeemeerman revolves around a young man who has a hard time getting girls because he permanently smells of fish. The cure, offered by a mad professor, turns him into a male mermaid, or mer-man ('zeemeerman' in Dutch) It also turns out that he indeed was a human-animal hybrid all along.
  • Devilman (2004): A Japanese tokusatsu adaptation of Go Nagai's Devilman manga series making use of CGI effects. The film was universally panned, even by fans of the original manga, citing reasons such as the CGI being hideous, and the casting of various nationally-popular models and teen idols, many of whom had not starred in a movie prior to this one. In addition, reportedly, CGI was used for the fight scenes because director Hiroyuki Nasu did not know how to direct one with live actors. One year later, the movie won Grand Prize in the Bunshun Kiichigo Awards, the Japanese equivalent of the Razzie Awards.
  • Dirty Love (2005): Roger Ebert gave it his third zero star rating of the year, calling it "hopelessly incompetent," and "an affront to cheese" with reference to another review calling it "cheesy," saying that one scene verged "on dementia," and that he is uncertain whether "anyone involved has ever seen a movie, or knows what one is" ([13]).
Written by and starring Jenny McCarthy, it "won" four Razzie awards, for Worst Picture, Worst Director (John Mallory Asher), Worst Screenplay, and Worst Actress (McCarthy).[24] It also has a score of 8% on Rotten Tomatoes.[25] Roger Ebert said in his review, "On the basis of Dirty Love, I am not certain that anyone involved has ever seen a movie, or knows what one is," and on star Jenny McCarthy, he wrote, "I feel sorry for her."[26] He also calls the film "so pitiful it doesn't rise to the level of badness."[26]
  • Dr. Who and the Daleks (1965) : A film loosely based on the popular British television programme Doctor Who, this film is widely criticised among fans for being out of Who canon.
"The key frame animation, based on three-dimensional models, is rudimentary, with none of the characters proving visually arresting." (Frank Scheck, Hollywood Reporter)
"Eighty-five minutes you'll never get back." (Michael Phillip, Chicago Tribune).
"In "Doogal", setting the world right again involves a badly paced quest for three diamonds, assorted jokes that don't land, and a daringly incoherent climactic confrontation." (Ned Martel, The New York Times)
I removed this bfor the following reasons:
Reviews don't speak out as "horrible"
The movie had very little promotion/hype
It wasn't reviewed for critics, so its rating on RT isn't very relevant
A bad animation movie doesn't mean one of the worst animation movies ever (Has anyone even heard of this movie??)
The above posting for Doogal is unsigned so I'm not sure how long this debate has been going on but this film is continuously readded. Sources from the article are added which call it the worst of the year but that isn't enough. We need sources calling it the worst of all time.LM2000 (talk) 04:33, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Doom (2005): Big screen adaptation of the popular video game, starring The Rock and Karl Urban. Was not well received by critics. Ebert and Roeper both gave it "Thumbs down," and Roeper called it "one of the worst films of the year." In his review, Ebert comments "No, I haven't played [the video game], and I never will, but I know how it feels not to play it, because I've seen the movie. 'Doom' is like some kid came over and is using your computer and won't let you play." [15] The film currently has a 20% rating at Rotten Tomatoes. [16]
I was reviewing the history and saw this one added and was going to remove it, but someone thankfully beat me to the punch. I'm sure this movie sucks, but this isn't a list of "Movies That Suck", that, and it just came out! It needs more time to 'earn' being a 'worst' movie. Besides, the cites were very weak; quoting both Ebert and Roeper and a not-so-bad-when-compared-to-many-movies-NOT-on-this-list RT score simply does not cut it. Do not re-add until the initial reaction to this movie has died down and it's been 'proven' more 'worst' worthy.Dannybu2001 16:32, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Dracula 3000 (2004) : A movie about vampires in outer space, set in the year 3000.
  • Dracula vs. Frankenstein (1971): A Dracula with an afro joins forces with a mad scientist, Dr. Duryea (played by J. Carrol Naish in his last film role), to resurrect the Frankenstein monster, whose face appears to look like a raw steak. Like Naish, Lon Chaney Jr. also makes his last film appearance, playing an axe-wielding maniac who is a henchman to the mad doctor. Appeared in the 2004 DVD documentary, The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made. Previously held a spot in the IMDB Bottom 100.
  • Dragonball: Evolution (2009): Loosely based on the Dragon Ball manga and anime series, by Akira Toriyama, was panned by critics and fans alike. On Rotten Tomatoes it scored 13%, while on Metacritic it got a 45/100. Zac Bertschy of Anime News Network, originally disgusted at anime fans who decried the film via leaked set shots and trailers before the film's release, gave the movie 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.[27] 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".[28] 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".[29] 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.[30] The majority of the fans for the original series were very disappointed with its overall inaccuracies,[31] and some consider it as a parody of Dragon Ball.
The reviews are mixed, none of them cite it as being the "worst", and the scores from aggregate websites are too high. Sorry, it's just not notable enough. Fortdj33 (talk) 16:20, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
  • The Dukes of Hazzard (2005): A remake of the late 70s early 80s TV series The Dukes of Hazzard, this movie was slammed by Ben Jones (Cooter on the original TV series), saying it was an insult to fans of the TV show and the TV show itself. Peter Travers of Rolling Stone gave it zero stars, stating "There's a stink coming off the big-screen Dukes of Hazzard that even fans of the TV series (1979 to 1985) won't be able to shake out of their nostrils".
The film earned over $99M worldwide (as of this writing.)
The Dukes of Hazzard movie was removed from this listing. The original "Cooter" and a critic from Rolling Stone's dislike of the movie do not make it the worst ever. Also, contrary to the listing, the movie is now a financial success. It's 4.5 rating on IMDB would suggest it is a mediocre movie, but not within the realm of worst movies ever.
Added it back in - it is on Roger Ebert's worst list, which is listed as one of the prime examples from the top of the page. Turnstep 20:50, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
Re-deleted, it made a profit and Ebert's opinion can't be the sole reason. This isn't the "list of movies that sucked", it's "list of movies 'considered' the worst"
Well, Ebert does give a lot of weight to the film's quality. And profit doesn't mean anything. Like you said, it isn't a "list of movies that were commercially profitable," it's a "list of movies 'considered' the worst." And the fact that most movie theaters kicked it out after two weeks also has something to say, although I don't know quite what. - Hbdragon88 05:31, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Dumb & Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd (2003): Prequel to 1994 hit Dumb & Dumber paled in comparison and played to universally bad reviews. Most reviewers used puns like "Dumberest" to categorize the film. It also received a 9% rating at Rotten Tomatoes. [17] Some statements made by reviewers about the film include: "Relies on double entendres so obvious they wouldn't get a chuckle from Beavis and Butt-head"; "I'm not laughing"; "I can’t hate this film enough"; "I wouldn't want you to consider even renting this thing"; and "Whenever you have to draw on the former Full House dad for comedic salvation, you're seriously hurting." Reviewer Scott Von Doviak of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram called the movie "the most ill-conceived attempt at extending a franchise since the Pink Panther movie that was stitched together from outtakes after Peter Sellers died." Was also nominated for 3 Razzies. Most of its success probably came from the fact that it tried to pretend Jim Carrey was in it.
  • Double Dragon (1994): A very loose live-action film adaptation of the video game franchise of the same name. This film stars Mark Dacascos as Jimmy Lee and Scott Wolf as Billy Lee, along with Alyssa Milano as Marian Delario and Robert Patrick as Koga Shuko, the primary antagonist. In the movie, Jimmy and Billy Lee are only described as brothers, presumably to explain the differences in ethnicity, rather than twins. It was directed by James Yukich. The film takes place in a post earthquake Los Angeles, now referred to as "New Angeles".
The film was a box office bomb.[32] named Double Dragon in the countdown of 10 worst films based on videogames.[33] Rottentomatoes gives Double Dragon a 3.2 ratiing.[34] Rita Kempley of the Washington Post said the films was "clumsily paced by first-time director Jim Yukich:[35] Time Magazine named Double Dragon one of the 10 worst films ever based on a video game.[36] Siskel and Ebert both gave Double Dragon thumbs down.[37] —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


  • The Emoji Movie (2017)-Despite winning multiple Razzies and critics/audiences agreeing it stinks, it was a box office hit.
  • Envy (2004): This film, which starred Ben Stiller and Jack Black, was so poorly received by test audiences it almost went straight to video. Due to the success of School of Rock (2003) (which starred Jack Black), Envy was finally released theatrically, but was again poorly received. It has a 5% Rotten Tomato rating [18], and both Jack Black and Jeffrey Katzenberg publicly apologized for the film at the 2004 Cannes Film Festival. Because of its poor performance in the U.S. it went straight to video in Europe [19].
  • Eragon (film) (2006) : This adaptation was hated by critics, recieving a 12% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Most fans of the book hated it and has made 70 million dollars on a budget of 100 million.


  • Fahrenheit 451 (1966): This film is an adapted version of Ray Bradbury's novel of the same name. It was directed by François Truffaut, renowned French director. It was his first movie done in English. Reasons this movie is nominated is because of frequent use of stock footage, a repetitive soundtrack that hit the same four notes in a grindingly frustrating pattern, and incredible lengths of 'artistic integrity', including a scene where a woman is smiling as she is burned alive by a kerosene fire. The story deviated wildly from the book, missing the point of the story, and even ruining the ending.
At Rotten Tomatoes, it actually has a 100% rating, although it is an old movie, so the ratings can't be too reliable. -What is the logic behind that statement? The critic's opinion is what it is.
"a repetitive soundtrack that hit the same four notes" Anyone who writes that just displays his total ignorance of film music. In fact, Bernard Herrmann's score is regarded as one of the best of its time, and completely characteristic of the composer of Psycho and Vertigo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas M+ (talkcontribs) 15:32, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Can any of this really be considered good reasons? The only piece of evidence as to whether the film is good or not is that its score on Rotten Tomatoes is 100%, a point in its favor. The rest sounds like the article's writer is simply whining about how the film isn't the way they wanted it to be. There is no evidence as to whether any of the issues would be taken from a different point of view. (talk) 23:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
  • The Fantastic Four (unreleased film) was added to the list a few days ago. However, it's hard to find actual citations of this film's badness, largely because it was never commercially released and so it got no professional reviews, wasn't eligible for Razzies, and so forth. Is it legitimate to regard the fact that the studio regarded the film as so bad as to be unreleasable (while lots of studios release lots of bad films every year) as itself a "citation" of the fact that this film was regarded as unusually bad? AJD 21:53, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm leaning against it. Since it didn't have a commercial release, very few people have ever seen it, so there won't ever be a critical or popular consensus of badness. - Lifefeed 18:19, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
I've removed it from the list altogether; since it was never released theatrically (or even on video), it cannot have a fair evaluation Dannybu2001 19:28, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Fantastic Four (2005 film) (2005): After the disaster of the 1994 Fantastic Four film, expectations were high. The critical reaction was overwhelmingly negative, scoring only a 26% at Rotten Tomatoes, a movie review aggregation website. The movie was criticized for weak storytelling, poor science, and paper-thin characters — especially the bland Doctor Doom, arguably one of the hallmark villains in the Marvel Comics world. In addition, Jessica Alba's performance earned her a Razzie nomination for Worst Actress. It should be noted, however, that unlike most of the films listed here, Fantastic Four gets decent ratings from viewers, including a 6.0 on the Internet Movie Database.
26% at Rotten Tomatoes is not "overwhelmingly negative". The reviews of this film were more like mixed-to-negative. The consensus didn't say it was terrible, it said it was "goofy and mediocre". (talk) 23:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Interesting that three Fantastic Fours have been removed from the list. The 2015 version was called the worst of its year and worst of its genre but not the worst of all time.LM2000 (talk) 23:39, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Feardotcom (2002): An horror film directed by William Malone and starring Stephen Dorff, Natascha McElhone and Stephen Rea. The film, upon release, was almost universally panned by critics, as the film holds a 3% rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 99 reviews.[54] The film was often criticized for its lack of originality, specifically, the plot seems to be too derivative of Ring, even though Feardotcom came out two months before the American version of The Ring. The premise is also very similar to that of Japanese film Kairo, released in 2001, and David Cronenberg's Videodrome.[citation needed] Andrew Manning of Radio Free Entertainment stated that "Of all the trash I had to watch in 2002, the insipid FearDotCom easily ranks among the worst.",[55] while Oz of stated: "In a year that has given us some of the worst films of all time, this must surely rank as the worst -- and that's a hard thing to do opposite Master of Disguise."[56]
Worst movie of 2002? Most likely. Worst Ever? Very Unlikely. FN071299 (talk) 17:45, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (2001): A massively-budgeted CGI animated film, directed by a video game creator and funded by Square Pictures, a studio created by video game company Square Co., Ltd. It was hyped as a groundbreaking film that would pave the way for photorealistic animated actors indistinguishable from flesh-and-blood. Instead, many viewers found the stiff motion and glassy stares of the characters uninvolving or unnerving, and the film came to be Roger Ebert's go-to example of the pitfalls of the uncanny valley. The film is now often used in computer animation courses as a demonstration of how not to animate human characters. Worse yet, the story was unable to live up to even its video game roots, disappointing many hard-core fans of the Final Fantasy game series. Almost certainly the biggest box office bomb in history, even adjusting for inflation, the film lost over $120 million, making it Square Pictures' first, last, and only feature film.
Yes a bad movie, but mixed reviews according to rotten tomatoes and metacritic
I put it here, not so much for the badness (and it is bad), but because the intro mentions "overhyped" as a criterion. The movie was rediculously overhyped, saying that photoreal CGI human characters would soon exist side-by-side with live actors; even many of the positive reviews are "this is a bad movie, but the technology is The Future of Film". Given that a major criticism is how bad the animation actually is, and that this hubris lead to a $120 million loss and the bankruptcy of a studio, I thought it merited inclusion. But I'm willing to defer to other opinions if people generally think it's unworthy of inclusion in the article. --Misterwindupbird 17:44, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
It's more of a "Didn't Meet Expecatations" and "Box Office Bomb/Dissappointment" movie than a 'worst film'. The money-factor--on this or any movie--really only applies if it was also critically panned (generally resulting in the bad box office.) It doesn't really seem to 'qualify' as written. As far as 'overhyped', personally, I don't think that has any place as a criterium; that can be said of a lot of movies, and is kind of a Catch-22 considering that other movies are said to fail due to 'lack' of hype (a.k.a. 'advertising'.) Perhaps it should be edited? Dannybu2001 18:27, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
I re-read how the 'hyping' thing is written, seems fine as is. I don't think it reads as saying overhyped, box-office failures count as 'worst'; again, it only applies if it's also critically panned, which FF has mostly mixed reviews, with a leaning toward 'not-so-great' more than 'worst', 'bad', or even 'poor'.Dannybu2001 18:38, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Oh, boy, I'm almost ashamed to say it. When I first saw it, I kinda liked it. --Surten (talk) 05:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Surten
  • Finding Rin Tin Tin (2007): The lowest ranked film on the French site AlloCiné, compiling the ratings of several movie critics, is this Bulgarian-American film, which was unanimously ranked 1 star. Harsh reviews for sure, but not necessarily the worst movie ever made.
  • The Fog (2005): This remake of the 1980 horror by John Carpenter was not screened to critics in advance. After the movie was released to the public, critics jabbed it as the worst horror movie in years. They point out that the movie is laden with lame CGI effects, wooden acting, a boring and predictable plotline (Frank Scheck from the Hollywood Reporter says that "Director Rupert Wainwright fails to bring any style to the material, not producing a fraction of the suspense or wit generated by Carpenter in the original even while working with a far lesser budget."[20]), and the stereotypical black guy (who, when he is arrested for "killing" the passengers on a ship, says that he was "just chillin'" in the meat freezer), mainly used for comedic effect and adds no effect of horror in the film. The Fog is currently #100 on the IMDb bottom 100 and has garnered an 8% on the Rotten Tomatoes Tomatometer.
has only been in theaters for a month. Despite it's rather poor reviews, there's no hype as it being one of the worst ever. Worst of the year? Most likely. Ever? No.
  • Foodfight! (2012):Foodfight! is a 2012 American computer animated adventure comedy film produced by Threshold Entertainment and directed by Larry Kasanoff. The film features the voices of Charlie Sheen, Wayne Brady, Hilary Duff, and Eva Longoria. Originally planned for a Christmas 2003 release, the film was pushed to late 2005. The Fireman's Fund Insurance Company and International Film Guarantors were set to auction off the film and all associated rights in September 2011, to settle C47 Productions and Threshold Animation Studios defaulted loan for the film. Indiewire called Foodfight! " one of the worst animated films ever made." Also, Nathan Rabin covered this movie for his "My Year of Flops" series, criticizing it for " The grotesque ugliness of the animation alone would be a deal-breaker even if the film weren’t also glaringly inappropriate in its sexuality, nightmare-inducing in its animation, and filled with Nazi overtones and iconography even more egregiously unfit for children than the script’s wall-to-wall gauntlet of crude double entendres and weird intimations of interspecies sex"...and saying "Foodfight"! doesn’t just represent one of the entertainment world’s most appalling lapses of taste, restraint, and judgment in recent memory; it’s one of those fall-of-civilization moments."
Most of the criticism for this film comes from Youtube critics, who are not WP:reliable. So far no reliable sources have been provided which call this the worst film ever made, therefore it isn't suitable for the list. LM2000 (talk) 16:35, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Frogs for Snakes (1999): A torturous caper film, of which Roger Ebert wrote:

    "I was reminded of Mad Dog Time (1996), another movie in which well-known actors engaged in laughable dialogue while shooting one another. Of that one, I wrote: 'Mad Dog Time is the first movie I have seen that does not improve on the sight of a blank screen viewed for the same length of time.' Now comes Frogs for Snakes, the first movie I have seen that does not improve on the sight of Mad Dog Time." [21]

  • Freddy vs. Jason (2003): While a box office success and fairly well received critically (at least among fans and genre critics), many felt that the film failed to live up to the hype that had been building up for so long for such a highly anticipated film. It was widely considered lame with bad acting, screenwriting, and plot. This is mostly faulted to the plot, which is often cited as adding little to the genre, and the characters being standard slasher stereotypes. While these criticisms are argued to be expected in the genre, others express the desire for something different in a film that they believe should be grander than both sets of predecessors and other slasher films. Some Friday the 13th fans have also expressed a distaste for the way in which Jason is portrayed in the film, although these complaints may have root in the controversial decision not to cast fan favourite Kane Hodder again in the role he played consecutively in the previous four Friday the 13th films. However, one of the most talked about aspects is the final scene, which has caused endless debates among fans of both franchises as to its meaning and who of the two actually comes off as the victor.
Bad horror movie, yes, but not worst EVER. Writeup even admits being disappointment rather than truly bad.
  • Future War (1995): A longtime entry in the IMDb bottom 100, the film is notorious for poor special effects (including shots of dinosaurs that amount to little more than someone holding a toy dinosaur right by the camera) and badly staged martial-arts sequences. Almost half of the film was shot in a few days with next to no budget, after the original director's cut consisted of only 40 minutes of footage with no action sequences. The producers admitted they expected it to be shown on Mystery Science Theater 3000 (which happened a few years later).


  • Galaxy of Terror (1981): A low-budget clone of Alien, featuring appearances from Erin Moran, Robert Englund, and Ray Walston. The movie involves a terrifying pyramid found in space that turns many things into horror. One of its unit directors was a young James Cameron, who made maggots wiggle on a severed arm. Appeared in the 2004 DVD documentary, The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made.
  • Get Carter (2000): Sylvester Stallone takes up the position of Jack Carter, previously played by Michael Caine. It has a 10% rating at and voters at named it the worst remake ever. [22]
  • Ghost Dad (1990): This fantasy comedy was directed by Sidney Poitier and stars Bill Cosby as the titular role. Much like the reviews for Cosby's previous film, Leonard Part 6 (1987), the reviews for Ghost Dad were also negative. Roger Ebert gave the film half a star, writing "Ghost Dad is a desperately unfunny film - a strained, contrived construction that left me shaking my head in amazement… How could Sidney Poitier, a skilled filmmaker with an actor's sense of timing, have been the director of this mess? How did a production executive go for it? Who ever thought this was a good idea?"[57] Vincent Canby of The New York Times wrote "As the movie goes on, Mr. Cosby's double takes become so long and painfully deliberate that there is time for double takes within double takes."[58] Peter Rainer of the Los Angeles Times wrote, "A dinky, TV sitcom comedy like Ghost Dad doesn't serve Poitier's artistry, either behind the camera or in front of it."[59] John Ferguson of Radio Times gave the film one out of five stars, writing, "Bill Cosby has had a disastrous time trying to transfer his TV popularity to the big screen. Following the ill-conceived spy spoof Leonard Part 6 came this equally daft supernatural comedy that, despite the efforts of director Sidney Poitier, also went straight to video over here."[60] Ralph Novak of People wrote that "the film is confusingly inconsistent. Cosby is totally invisible at times, for instance; at other moments his clothes are visible but he's not."[61] Jay Boyar of the Orlando Sentinel wrote "Cosby's ill-fated Leonard Part 6 (1987) was, by his own admission, not very funny, and neither is the new Ghost Dad."[62] Desmond Ryan of The Philadelphia Inquirer wrote "In his last film outing, Bill Cosby survived Leonard Part 6, a massive flop that would have killed the career of anyone who lacked his clout in the entertainment industry. Ghost Dad disappoints anyone hoping for a resurrection."[63] Dennis King of Tulsa World wrote that Cosby's "recent movies stink. Cosby's last movie, Leonard Part 6, has become synonymous with "bomb." Ghost Dad does nothing to improve Cosby's track record."[64] Caitlin Creevy of the Chicago Tribune gave the film half a star, calling the film an "embarrassment."[65] Ghost Dad currently has a "rotten" 7% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.[66]
  • The Giant Claw (1957): A monster movie about a giant bird " big as a battleship" starring Jeff Morrow as a pilot. The Giant Claw has gone down in history as one of the worst movies ever made, with some referring it as "The Citizen Kane of bad B-movies",[67][68][69] mainly because of its terrible special effects. The bird in particular is considered one of history's worst movie monsters, being an unconvincing marionette puppet with a very odd face. The film is riddled with stock footage, making continuity a serious issue. Jeff Morrow, the star of the film, went to a screening of the movie; the audience laughed and sneered when they saw the ridiculous bird monster, and reportedly Morrow walked home drunk.[70][71] This was the only "worst B-movie" to be distributed by a major motion picture studio,[citation needed] which featured it on a double bill with The Night the World Exploded.
  • Glitter (2002): Glitter is a musician film that was intended to be Mariah Carey's acting debut and was directed by Vondie Curtis Hall. The film starred Carey, Max Beesley, Terrence Howard, Da Brat, Tia Texada, Eric Benét, and Ann Magnuson. In the film Carey stars as a young musician named Billie Frank who begins dating a disc jockey who helps her get into the music business, but their relationship become complicated as she ascends to super stardom. Glitter was a box office bomb ($5 million against a $22 million budget)[72] and a critical failure garnering a mere 7% on Rotten Tomatoes with the consensus stating "Glitter is a hodgepodge of movie cliches and bad acting that's sure to generate unintentional laughs. Unfortunately, the movie is not bad enough to be good". Mariah Carey has since stated that she regrets appearing in the film. At the 22nd Golden Raspberry Awards, the film received six nominations including Worst Picture and Worst Screen Couple for Carey's cleavage,[73] and one win, for Carey who received the Razzie for Worst Actress.[74] The Village Voice proclaimed, "For her part, Carey seems most concerned about keeping her lips tightly sealed like a kid with braces, and when she tries for an emotion—any emotion—she looks as if she's lost her car keys."[75] "Total Film" magazine reviewed the film extremely [76] negatively, awarding it just one star and stating, "It can't even scale heights of campy awfulness. This isn't so bad it's good, it's so bad it's actionable...An inept star vehicle that starts out desperately tedious and gets less interesting. Leaves you wishing the Lumiére brothers had said bollocks to cinema and gone down the pub". The film is listed in Golden Raspberry Award founder John Wilson's book The Official Razzie Movie Guide as one of the The 100 Most Enjoyably Bad Movies Ever Made.[77]
This film has been added too many times without any sources calling this movie the worst of all time. We need reliable sources before re-adding this film to the main page. FN071299 (talk) 17:48, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Godzilla (1998): Based on the popular Japanese monster of the same name, The film received generally negative reviews from critics.[78] Rotten Tomatoes reported that only 25% of 63 sampled critics gave the film a positive review, with an average score of 4.7 out of 10.[79] At Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average out of 100 to critics' reviews, the film received a score of 32 based on 23 reviews.[78] In 1999, at the Huntley Hotel Garden Room in Santa Monica, California, the film won Golden Raspberry Awards for Worst Supporting Actress for Pitillo and Worst Remake or Sequel. The film was also nominated for Worst Picture, Worst Director, and Worst Screenplay.[80]
Writing for the Chicago Sun-Times, Roger Ebert gave the film one-and-a-half stars out of four, noting that "One must carefully repress intelligent thought while watching such a film. The movie makes no sense at all except as a careless pastiche of its betters (and, yes, the Japanese Godzilla movies are, in their way, better - if only because they embrace dreck instead of condescending to it). You have to absorb such a film, not consider it. But my brain rebelled, and insisted on applying logic where it was not welcome." Ebert also pointed out on his review that the characters Mayor Ebert and his assistant Gene were Devlin and Emmerich's jabs at his and Gene Siskel's negative reviews of Stargate and Independence Day.[81] Gene Siskel also commented on the parody characters arguing "If you're going to go to the trouble of putting us in a monster movie, why don't you at least take advantage of this by having the monster either eat or squash one of us?" In an entirely negative review, James Berardinelli writing for ReelViews, called the film "one of the most idiotic blockbuster movies of all time, it's like spitting into the wind. Emmerich and Devlin are master illusionists, waving their wands and mesmerizing audiences with their smoke and mirrors. It's probably too much to hope that some day, movie-goers will wake up and realize that they've been had."[82] Stephen Holden of The New York Times wrote that the film "is so clumsily structured it feels as if it's two different movies stuck together with an absurd stomping finale glued onto the end. The only question worth asking about this $120 million wad of popcorn is a commercial one. How much further will the dumbing down of the event movie have to go before the audience stops buying tickets?"[83]
Very close, but "Entirely negative review" isn't enough. We need reliable sources that is explicitly called the worst PLUS only one critic calls this film the worst.TD712 (talk) 17:55, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Godsend (2004): I think Godsend would be a viable candidate -- could someone please add this to the article with the necessary references and explanation?
  • Going Overboard (1989): Starring comedian Adam Sandler in his film debut, the film frequently ranks very "high" on the IMDb Bottom 100; currently at #11 as of April 24, 2015. The production was shot entirely on a cruise ship going from New Orleans to Cancun. The ship was going to the Miss Universe Pageant and was filled with beauty queens from all over the United States. The camera crew forgot to bring a box of lenses on the ship, so the director of photography was forced to shoot with the wrong lenses. Sandler was so ashamed of this film that it is not even listed on his official website. One reviewer said of the film, "If you hate Adam Sandler, you'll hate this movie. If you love Adam'll still hate this movie."
I tried to add this as a submission, but it was rejected because, as Czolgolz says, "nothing says this was one of the worst movies of all time". --MaxamillionSmart (talk) 13:08, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Great White (1980): The movie is widely decried as an Italian-made copy of Jaws, with its many similarities to Jaws and Jaws 2. Its release in theatres was blocked after Universal Pictures sued the film's makers and won the case. Appeared in the 2004 DVD documentary, The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made.


  • Happily N'Ever After (2007): The film was panned by critics. Most of the criticisms included poor animation, lazy casting, tepid jokes, and a large number of critics felt the plotline was ripping off Shrek and Hoodwinked!. On its opening weekend it only grossed $6.6 million. According to Rotten Tomatoes, it only has a 4% critical approval rating on the tomatometer (and a very rare 0% in the "cream of the crop" division), yet it received a 3.1 average rating.[84]
  • Holy Man (1998): Clumsy story of a holy man who reinvigorates a floundering Home Shopping Network by telling the truth about its products. Holy Man recieved an 11% rating at Rotten Tomatoes.
  • Honest (2000) has been ranked among the Top 10 vanity projects[85], and one critic remarked, "It is the worst kind of rubbish, the kind that makes you angry you have wasted 105 minutes of your life watching it."[23]; however, it is not widely known outside of the U.K.
  • The Honeymooners (2005): The movie Honeymooners needs to be added. It is a recent addition to IMBb's worst movies of all time.
  • Howling: New Moon Rising, Critical reception for New Moon Rising has been predominantly negative and TV Guide remarked that the movie was "a new low for the franchise." Cinema Crazed and Dread Central both heavily panned the film, and Cinema Crazed commented that "Asking anyone to watch “The Howling: New Moon Rising” should be punishable by jail time and some kind of psychological examination."Bloody Disgusting also gave a negative review, stating that the movie "ranks right up there with Troll 2 as the most hilarious bad movie ever made" and that they believed that the movie kept the names of the actors and the town to "cut down on the people forgetting each others names because they had a hard enough time remembering their lines" It is also considered to be one of the worst movies ever made and also the worst of "The Howling" franchise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:41, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Hudson Hawk (1991): Starring Bruce Willis, this movie was a notoriously panned big-budget flop and a "winner" of three Razzie awards for Worst Picture, Worst Director, and Worst Screenplay (which Willis co-wrote). Star Richard E. Grant tells in his autobiography of how the script was extensively rewritten during filming. Over the years, it has garnered a fanbase, who see it as an over-the-top parody that most people didn't "get" when it came out. Ears4life (talk) 17:07, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Hudson Hawk was a box office bomb. [86] Part of the reason for the box office failure is that the film is clearly intended as an absurd comedy and yet was marketed as an action film one year after the success of Die Hard 2. When the film came to home video the tag line "Catch The Adventure, Catch The Excitement, Catch The Hawk" was changed to "Catch The Adventure, Catch The Laughter, Catch The Hawk" [87]

Hudson Hawk has a rottentomatoes has an average rating of 3.6. [88] At metacritic all but two critics gave it a negative review. [89] Roger Ebert named Hudson Hawk on his list of worst movies of 1991. [90] Both Siskel and Ebert did not like Hudson Hawk.[91] Critics at msn movies gave Hudson Hawk 1 star. [92] Hudson Hawk was nominated for the following catagories in the 1992 Razzie Awards but did not win: Worst Actor (Bruce Willis), Worst Supporting Actor (Richard E. Grant) and Worst Supporting Actress (Sandra Bernhard). Hudson Hawk was nominated for and won the following catagories in the 1992 Razzie Awards: Worst Director (Michael Lehmann), Worst Picture (Joel Silver), Worst Screenplay: Daniel Waters, Steven E. de Souza, Robert Kraft (story) and Bruce Willis (story), and Worst Actor (Bruce Willis). Hudson Hawk was also nominated in 2000 for Worst Picture of the Decade. [93]

Hudson Hawk has the dubious distinction of being the final film produced by TriStar Pictures prior to their being bought out and merged with Columbia Pictures (which was going through similar financial difficulties). Because Hawk (in conjunction with other unsuccessful movies from the same studio) had lost so much money, the Sony Corporation had to salvage TriStar by purchasing its remaining stock, and by reorganizing the company as part of the recently-formed Sony Studios. As with United Artists when they were bought out by MGM, Columbia and Tri-Star were allowed to keep their own logos, and to continue making movies under their own names.


  • The Ice Pirates (1984): In the future, water is a priceless substance. Space pirates are captured, sold to a princess, and enlisted to help find her father. This Space Opera has sword fights, explosions, fighting robots, castrating machines, monsters, bar fights, time warps and inexplicable blobby monsters.
  • The Incredible Torture Show, later released as Blood Sucking Freaks (1976): Lacks the references required for it being labeled as one of the worst ever made.
  • Needs more than one review calling it worse than a film on this list.LM2000 (talk) 12:28, 1 June 2017 (UTC)


  • Jaws: The Revenge (1987): Jaws: The Revenge is rated 25 of the worst sequels ever made by film critics and it earned the lowest amount from the franchise and received poor critical reception. It scored a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes and received $5 Million less than its predecessor and contains many implausible scenes such as the Shark swimming from a New York island to the Bahamas (approx. 2000 km) under three days. It received a worldwide Box Office take of $51,881,013.
This movie has been removed several times, and while it might be the worst Jaws movie, it has no references making it one of the worst ever made. Sorry, just not notable enough. Fortdj33 (talk) 02:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
@Fortdj33 It is now. I re-edited its re-entry onto this list with more references than the one above it. 132453626236:CA (talk) 01:18, 7 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

Bad comedy? Yes. Worst ever? No. References making it one of the worst ever made have not been implied. Sorry, not notable enough for it to go there. 132453626236:CA (talk) 01:18, 7 April 2012 (UTC)


  • King's Ransom (2005): Anthony Anderson portrays Malcolm King, an obnoxious but rich businessman who stages his own kidnapping to avoid paying a heavy divorce settlement to his wife. In the process, various film cliches like the mistaken identity and the bumbling white guy (Jay Mohr) come into play, but no plot devices could save this movie from ignominy. While relatively benign in comparison to the other films on the list, it deserves a spot nonetheless for its mix of offensive "humor" (Charlie Murphy has a cameo as a gay gangsta), a barely-discernible plot, and next to no comedic value. It is currently Metacritic's third-worst movie of 2005 (behind Chaos and Alone in the Dark), but it is also the 19th-worst movie ever made according to that metric, checking in with an extremely low score of 11/100.


There are several new movies on the IMDb Bottom 100, Aquamarine, ATL and Medea's Family Reunion being some of them; all of which recieved average reviews on RT. Yes, it was a bomb and recieved horrible reviews, but there's little likelihood it'll be remembered in three weeks; also, Lumenick is a rather tough critic. If it won't be remembered in three weeks, it's forgettable, not one of the worst ever.Ohyeahmormons 01:48, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
The Last House on the Left, and some telling of how depressing and hopeless it was. (Michael Wilmington of the Chicago Tribune said that he "would only recommend it to my worst enemies, [and] even then I'd flinch.") At an L.A. screening, the audience was given copies of Roger Ebert's zero-star review (a rarity for him, although he also gave one to Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo the same weekend) as well as their response letter defending it. At the Q&A after the screening, the director (David DeFalco, a former wrestler) talked of how "hardcore" it was, adding that he was a "demon" and "the king of violence and evil;" however, when the audience began attacking the film, he and the producer began defending the film as a "cautionary tale." The audience then pointed out how the film was exploitative, which prompted DeFalco to essentially threaten the audience ("You saw what was on the screen, you know what I'm capable of"). Even the actors in the film are ashamed of it, having crashed the L.A. screening to criticise the film and DeFalco; they originally signed on to do a remake of Last House on the Left, but the film was changed into its current form and they were obligated by contract to work on it.
Is this talk of a remake? "Last House" was directed by Wes Craven not David DeFalco.
Answer to above question: This is actually referring to the film "Chaos" - a 2005 film directed by David DeFalco which is a "Last House" ripoff.


  • Machhli Jal Ki Rani Hai (2014): Machhli Jal Ki Rani Hai is a Bollywood film directed by Debaloy Dey.[1] The film stars Bhanu Uday, Swara Bhaskar, Murli Sharma and Reema Debnath. It is scheduled to release at 13 June 2014. A sequel to the movie is also on cards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Troydevinny545 (talkcontribs) 12:40, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Mad Dog Time (1996): Gangster movie, probably intended as a comedy, with a voice-over at the beginning explaining that it takes place in an alternate universe. Roger Ebert comments in his zero star review that this flop (renamed Trigger Happy for video release) "is the first movie I have seen that does not improve on the sight of a blank screen viewed for the same length of time" [27].
WHAT? How could this film not be on the list? Can someone provide an explanation? --Hmdwgf (talk) 16:31, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Material Girls (2006): This film received bad buzz from the promotion period to the actual release. The opening weekend saw a gross of $4.62 million in over 1500 theaters. It has recieved an abysmal 6% of the critic's approval [28] from Rotten Tomatoes, a low average score of 17 out of 100 from Metacritics [29], and was immediately ranked number one on the IMDb's Bottom 100 list after only a week of release [30] with 1.6 out of 10. So far, the production has very low anticipations for its international releases after very negative receptions in their original production country (United States). People also predict that one (mainly Hilary) or both of the Duff sisters may be a shoo-in for a Razzie nomination(s).
Other movies, such as Little Man and Phat Girlz, went to #1 on the Bottom 100 right after its release. For that reason, the IMDb Bottom 100 is not reliable. Although $4.62 out of 1500 theaters is a flop, it isn't exactly a huge loss. Besides, if the criteria for "Worst movies ever" is bad reviews and bad box office, the list would be endless. I also found this statement to be quite POV (A shoo-in for Razzie nominations? That seems to be one's two cents than an actual prediction). Ohyeahmormons 17:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Millennium (1989): Science fiction film criticized for an outrageous plot, terrible acting, and showing basically the same shots twice from different camera angles for the second half of the film.
  • Mesa of Lost Women (1952): Low-budget fantasy film which features an enlarged image of a puppet spider, sent by a mad scientist played by Jackie Coogan to destroy everything. Won the award of "Most Primitive Male Chauvinist Fantasy" in the 1986 book, Son of Golden Turkey Awards, and included in the 2004 DVD documentary, The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made.
  • Mister Magoo (1997): Disney's live action version of the cartoon character starring Leslie Neilsen as the myopic (nearsighted) millionare who continually mistakes things for other things. Of ironic note was the disclaimer at the end of the movie to the effect that "the preceding movie was not intended to offend or make light of the problems experienced by the visually impaired". Many audiences neverthless felt that this was an insult to their intelligence.
What the fuck is it with your writing style? It's as if you knew that your writing was complete bullshit, so you tried to cover it up by using up a source on every single word. Fuck you and don't come back to this article until you find more eligible sources claiming it to be the worst ever. End of story. (talk) 15:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Mitchell (1975): Joe Don Baker plays the direct antithesis of almost all fictional detectives: an overweight, unkempt, unlikeable, incompetent, alchoholic detective. He seems to spend most of his time between seemingly unconnected plotlines in that the burglar shooting early in the movie and John Saxon's shady lawyer character seem to have no connection to Martin Balsam and Merlin Olsen's drug smuggler characters. Mitchell's sleeping with a prostitute, the slow car chase, the argument with the kid, and the somewhat borrowed Key Largo ending are among the other interesting elements of this movie. This movie, along with Manos: The Hands of Fate, has achieved unexpected cult status through Mystery Science Theater 3000 (widely suggested as the only way one should view this film), much to the displeasure of Baker.
In it's defense, the MST3K version (which is all most people have seen) is heavily edited, and the full picture without the cuts makes much more sense.
  • Moment by Moment (1978): Love story between John Travolta (playing a character named Strip) and Lily Tomlin. The movie was so unsuccessful it was never released on video. Critic John Simon referred to it as "Aeon by Aeon". Named worst movie of the year by Esquire magazine.
  • mother! (2017) Directed by Darren Aronofsky, the Biblical and Gaian allegory mother! divided critics and audiences. Despite a Rotten Tomatoes score of 69%, the film attracted several strongly negative reviews from critics, with Rex Reed in the New York Observer calling it "the worst movie of the century",[96] Kyle Smith in the conservative National Review describing it as "the vilest movie ever released by a major Hollywood studio",[97], and Michael Heaton for The Plain Dealer naming it "the worst movie I have ever seen".[98] The Daily Telegraph noted that social media reaction was similarly split, with "some calling it a masterpiece, others proclaiming it the worst film they've ever seen", and the film was one of only 20 ever to receive an F grade, the lowest, from movie audiences as tracked by CinemaScore.[99] Aronofsky and stars Jennifer Lawrence and Javier Bardem were all nominated for the 38th Golden Raspberry Awards.[100] Peter Bradshaw for The Guardian, who had given the film five out of five stars in his review, suggested that the film suffered more from mis-marketing and the audience expectations from casting Hunger Games star Lawrence than its own merits or flaws.[101] A deliberately non-committal review from The Globe and Mail gave the film lowest and highest marks simultaneously, and suggested that it was "a once-in-a-lifetime film, whatever that means to you".[102]
    • The warning on the top of the talk page says that before adding a film "Ensure that it is widely considered one of the worst films by a broad spectrum of both casual and professional film critics". That's most definitely not the case with mother!. Some critics really hated it, but it had a mostly positive reception (69% on Rotten Tomatoes, 75 score on Metacritic). No broad spectrum. Aquila89 (talk) 08:06, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • My Mom's New Boyfriend (2008) A Meg Ryan vehicle that is supposedly a romantic comedy, the film tends to fall flat on its jokes and fails to even bring life to the cliched story. Another problem was the focus of Ryan and her face being botoxed. The film was released in theatres internationallly but is given a direct-to-DVD treatment in the United States. There are no reviews for the movie in Rotten Tomatoes as of now.


"New York Minute was Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen's first foray into feature films (after years of direct-to-video features" ...and It Takes Two. If a source considering it the WORST EVER has New York Minute, it could be readded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
  • No Holds Barred (1989): The movies was launched as an attempt to boost Hulk Hogan's acting career several years after his appearance in Rocky III. The movie was heavily promoted on World Wrestling Federation television. No Holds Barred currently has a 3.6 rating at the Internet Movie Database,[103] while at Rotten Tomatoes it has a rare 0%[104] Both Siskel and Ebert gave it thumbs down. Siskel called it "miserable" and "a really awful type of film". He also said a girl walked out about half way through the film and "you have to make a film pretty bad for a child to walk out of the picture." Ebert said "you get jokes about people soiling their pants, about overflowing urinals, about all kinds of vulgarity, all kinds of digusting behavior...little kids ... are just going to be offended and disappointed in it."[105]


  • Old Dogs (2009) A comedy film from Walt Disney Pictures directed by Walt Becker and starring John Travolta and Robin Williams, along with a few other actors such as Seth Green and Bernie Mac (in his final film role) playing supporting roles, Old Dogs was panned by critics, currently holding a 5% on Rotten Tomatoes.[119] Roger Ebert started his review for the film by saying "'Old Dogs' is stupefying dimwitted. What were John Travolta and Robin Williams thinking of? Apparently their agents weren't perceptive enough to smell the screenplay in its advanced state of decomposition". He gave the film one star out of four.[citation needed] The Orlando Sentinel's Roger Moore gave Old Dogs a rating of one and a half stars out of a possible four.[120] He wrote "The new comedy from some of the folks who brought us Wild Hogs is badly written and broadly acted, shamelessly manipulative and not above stopping by the toilet for a laugh or two." Tim Robey of The Telegraph savaged the film, saying, "Old Dogs is so singularly dreadful it halts time, folds space and plays havoc with the very notion of the self."[121] He added to the review, "Being a film critic is a wonderful job, but there are weeks when the bad film delirium strikes and we’d all be better off in straitjackets. A colleague opined to me the other day that this might be the deadliest run of releases in his 20-year history on the job, and I can completely see that." He also said, "You'd have to hate your family to take them to this!" He gave the film zero stars. Carrie Rickey gave the film a more positive review, with a rating of two and a half stars out of four.[122] Rickey commented of the multiple cameos in the film, "A child of 5 can see that these brief appearances serve to pad a gauze-thin script."[122] Old Dogs may not be good. But the sight of pesky penguins pecking Travolta and Green in the embrace of an unlikely partner makes it just good enough." The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and AV Club said the movie was not recommended for adults or children.[123][124] Old Dogs was nominated for four categories during the 30th Golden Raspberry Awards ceremony, including Worst Picture, Worst Actor for John Travolta, Worst Supporting Actress for Kelly Preston and Worst Director for Walt Becker, but lost to All About Steve. Despite the horrendous reviews, the film did well at the box office, earning $96,753,696.
  • The Omega Code (1999): the most successful Christian movie of all time
How is this accurate?
Yes, arguably a dreadful movie, but not as successful as 'The Passion of the Christ', among others. Should this be changed?
I dropped it from the list until a source for "worst ever" is cited.
Note: Passion of the Christ wasn't technically a 'Christian' film, there's a difference between Catholicism and Christianity (not by much really, but there is), plus generally 'Christian films' refers to movies made by Christian companies, which sadly, Omega Code was mostly made by the TBN people; 'Passion' was just a Mel Gibson project that happened to get embraced by some in the religious community. Regardless, I've never heard of Omega Code being successful at all, it blew big time even if one ignores the biblical inaccuracies (which is diffult since they tried to make it the point of the movie.) Dannybu2001 16:49, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Catholicism is a devision of Christianity - check the sources right here at wiki. I think the difference your refering to is between Protestants and Catholics.
  • The One and Only (2002) starring Patsy Kensit was concieved as a film to promote a better image for Newcastle-Upon-Tyne receiving funding from the City Council and regional agencies. It was screened for a total of five days in a Newcastle cinema and failed to find distribution. -- I moved this from the article. Movies fail to secure distribution for lots of reasons: the apparent criteria for being included in the article require at least one critical citation of the movie's badness. Ellsworth 17:06, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • One Missed Call (2008) The American remake to the original currently holds a 0% rating on Rotten Tomatoes with the consensus,"One of the weakest entries in the J-horror sweepstakes,One Missed Call is undone from bland performances and shopworn shocks." Also Rotten Tomatoes gave it the mouldy tomato award for the Worst Movie of 2008. It grossed $45,847,356 on a $20 million dollar budget and the film is also criticised for borrowing plot elements from other movies.
    • I removed this entry from the list for lack of references Fortdj33 (talk) 16:00, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


Enough said? Not really. Paint Your Wagon, despite being a weird idea, isn't utterly terrible.
  • Petey Wheatstraw (1978) aka "Petey Wheatstraw, the Devil's Son-In-Law": The Devil offers a man the chance to return to earth if he agrees to be the Anti-Christ and marry the ugliest woman on Earth--the Devil's daughter.
Petey Wheatstraw knows EXACTLY what it is, though. It's a low-rent Rudy Ray Moore vehicle, with no apologies for being such. It could almost be considered intentionally bad, if the sequence where Rudy Ray Moore uses his magic powers to turn a fat woman skinny so she can get out of her lawn chair is any indication. I fucking love this movie. -HX 17:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Pink Flamingos (1972): Directed by John Waters and starring Divine, this movie is notorious for trying to be as disgusting as possible. Certainly the sex scene involving a chicken would be hard to surpass unless, of course, one were to watch the scene where Divine eats freshly excreted dog feces. From this description the reader should readily apprehend whether he/she is likely to regard the film as nauseating, or as one of the best ever made.
  • The Postman (1997): Two years after the controversial Waterworld, Kevin Costner involved himself in another post-apocalyptic film. This time, it was an adaptation of the novel by David Brin. Unlike Waterworld that received mostly mixed reviews and did well at the box office, the film was widely panned by critics and was more of a financial failure - the $80 million film made only $18 million at the North American box office.[125] Siskel & Ebert gave The Postman "Two Thumbs Down", with Siskel calling it "Dances with Myself" (in reference both to Costner's Oscar-winning film Dances With Wolves and the Billy Idol song "Dancing with Myself"; Ebert also referred to the end of the film, in which a bronze statue of The Postman is unveiled.[126] James Berardinelli of Reelviews called the film "dumb and riddled with gaping holes of logic, and the dialogue sounds like it was penned by a hack writer."[127] The film is ranked at 10% on Rotten Tomatoes.[128] The Postman took home five Razzies for Worst Picture, Worst Actor, Worst Director, Worst Screenplay and Worst Original Song for its entire film score. It won an award for every category in which it was nominated — the first time this had occurred in Razzie history[129] (with Battlefield Earth also accomplishing this feat, winning seven out of eight Razzies, with both Forest Whitaker and Barry Pepper being nominated from the same film for Worst Supporting Actor).
Not explicitly cited as the "worst movie of all time". Despite that only 10% of critics gave the film a positive review, its average critic score on Rotten Tomatoes is a 3.8/5, its score on Metacritic is a 29. It holds very moderate audience scores on Metacritic, IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes. Failed to win Worst Movie of the Decade Razzie. Nominated for Best Science Fiction Film in the Saturn Awards. Swarm X 07:13, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Poultrygeist (2007): B-movie company Troma Entertainment's final film, a box office bomb received poorly by the public, resulting in the independent film company's demise.[32] The film is directed by Troma president Lloyd Kaufman, and written by a former fluffer for Ron Jeremy and gay porn star Gabriel Friedman (who is also the film's editor) with Daniel Bova and Lloyd Kaufman. It was produced by Andy Deemer and Kiel Walker. The plot of the film involves a fast-food restaurant being attacked by chicken zombies. The plot's conceit, which is a parody of the Poltergeist film series, is that the restaurant is built on an ancient Indian burial ground, and the Indian spirits have merged with the dead chickens to create chicken zombies. In what director Kaufman claims is a "fromage" (Kaufman's pun on the term "homage") to the film The Happiness of the Katakuris directed by Takashi Miike, the film has a series of musical numbers. Principal photography for the film took place during the summer of 2005. The first Troma film to be funded out-of-pocket, director Lloyd Kaufman paid for the film with personal funds, it was also the last film by Troma Entertainment before the company folded later that year.


  • Raise the Titanic (1980): Based on Clive Cussler's book, this was the first attempt to film one of his novels. Reviews were atrocious, and audiences heavily ignored the movie, which had been criticized for a weak script and the casting of Richard Jordan as Dirk Pitt. Cussler himself admitted he didn't like this movie version of the book. Speaking of the film's titanic losses, producer Lew Grade reportedly commented "It would have been cheaper to lower the Atlantic."
  • Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985): Although it was a smash hit at the box office by racking up over $150 million and being the second most successful movie of 1985 (behind Back to the Future), it could not be spared the wrath of critics and Razzie-voters alike. Critics say that the second Rambo replaces the emotional depth and plot that made First Blood such a well-made movie with mindless shoot-em-up action scenes. Others say that this movie is pro-American propaganda, since they feel that it is an excuse for patching up the failure that the United States suffered in Vietnam. The second Rambo was nominated for seven Razzies, in which it won four (including Worst Picture of 1985, Worst Screenplay, and Worst Actor). The film earned $300.4M worldwide.
  • Ready to Rumble (2000): Considered to be one of the worst films of 2000. David Arquette and Scott Caan play port-a-potty cleaners (which in and of itself leads to plenty of toilet humor) who are dedicated WCW wrestling fans. The dimwitted duo attempt to help re-start the career of their favorite wrestler, Jimmy King (played by Oliver Platt). To help promote the film, Arquette was given a brief run as WCW Heavyweight Champion. WCW fans hated the idea with a passion, and Arquette himself thought it was a bad idea. Flopped both critically and at the box office; in his Movie Guide, Leonard Maltin gives it one and a half stars, and calls it a "lowbrow timewaster," and the film only made a little more than $12 million domestically. The film has a 25% rating from Rotten Tomatoes. Both the movie and Arquette's title reign were inducted into the WrestleCrap archives.
Yes a bad movie, worst of year, maybe but not one of the worst ever made --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 16:21, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
From Justin to Kelly was not a REALITY picture (leaving The Real Cancun to be the ONLY one.) Also the "Razzie for Worst Movie of 2003" award was actually called Worst Picture. It has been that way since it was first awarded on 31 March 1981. Go back to the Wikipedia article about this film and GET A CLUE! Add more references to the film as well. Do that! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Redline (2007): An action film about racing exotic cars. It has a zero percent rating at Rotten Tomatoes,[130] and has a 3 out of 10 star rating at the IMDb.[131] This movie stars Eddie Griffin, Nadia Bjorlin, and Nathan Phillips and became best known for Griffin's behind-the-scenes incident, when he crashed a rare Enzo Ferrari worth over $1 million for the movie's promotion.
  • Robotech the Movie: The Untold Story: Intended to bridge the gap between Macross and Southern cross segments of the Robotech series, this animated film was created by merging animation from anime OAV Megazone 23 and anime tv series Southern Cross. After an unsuccessful test run in Mesquite, Texas, it was pulled and permanently shelved by Harmony Gold U.S.A. Executive producer Carl Macek reports being unhappy with the film after distributor Cannon films demanded too many changes from his original vision and is said to have disowned it. Those few Robotech fans that have seen it, mostly via rare bootleg tapes, tend to agree that it's better that it was never widely released.


WOW! Only 6 words to say about the movie? You must have been asleep when you inserted this entry. Besides, the Nostalgia Critic reviewed it and said that it isn't that bad.
Zero critics gave it a positive review at rottentomatoes.[132] Santa With Muscles has been named one of the worst Christmas movies ever by moviefone.[133] Chris Hicks of The Deseret Times says "Hulk Hogan, who makes Arnold Schwarzenegger seem like Laurence Olivier, stars in this kiddie picture as an eccentric (what else?) billionaire who gets hit on the head and thinks he's the real Santa Claus. [134] --Kekkomereq4 (talk) 06:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
While poorly recieved, it is not considered to be one of the absolute worst films of all time. (Ibaranoff24 12:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC))
  • Savage Vengeance The film's star, Camille Keaton, refuses to speak of the film or its production. Her reasons for this haven't been made clear, but it has been rumored that she left the set before the end of the production, hence the film's abrupt end. Her only reference to appearing in the film came at a horror convention in 2005, when asked by a fan to explain her involvement in the movie, she replied: "I'm sorry, I can't speak about that." It has a 2.0 out of 10 on IMDB and is also considered to be one of the worst movies ever made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:49, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Saving Christmas (2014): Directed, produced and co-written by Darren Doane and starring Kirk Cameron, this faith-based Christmas comedy follows Kirk who's brother-in-law Christian (played by Doane) doesn't buy into the idea of the commercialism of Christmas instead of remembering the religious side of the holiday. The film was universally panned by critics and holds a 0% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. New York Times film critic Ben Kenigsberg said that Cameron's acting "sounds so forced you half-expect the camera to pull back to reveal hostage takers".[136] Three weeks after its release, the film gained additional notoriety when it became the lowest rated film on Internet Movie Database's bottom 100 list with a measly 1.5/10.[137][138] The film was also nominated for six Golden Raspberry Awards for Worst Picture, Worst Actor (Kirk Cameron), Worst Director (Darren Doane), Worst Supporting Actress (Bridgette Ridenour), Worst Screenplay (Darren Doane and Cheston Harvey) and Worst Screen Couple (Kirk Cameron and his ego). [139]
Lacks critics from reliable sources calling it one of the worst ever. It scores remarkably low in IMDB and RT fan polls but those cannot be used due to vote stacking (MOS:FILM#Audience_response). LM2000 (talk) 08:38, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
While making off with seven nominations from the Razzies and having recieved a 6% rating from Rotten Tomatoes, it's clearly not considered to be the one of the worst ever made.
Scream never appeared in the documentary. And I really don't see what that Simpson's episode has to with this.
I'm stopping now. If I wanted to be truly ruthless (actually I kind of do, but I don't want to be stoned), there are more that aren't supported by much in the way of actual evidence. I tended to leave ones that were the only ones in their sub-group because I did't want to mess up the alphabetical listing. I'm not saying that this films don't deserve to be listed, just that I think they should have better citations. (You are welcome to disagree.) -Aranel ("Sarah") 02:06, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
As if we didn't know. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band was actually BASED on The Beatles album, the songs WERE related, and it was based on their influential 1967 album. This is basically someone giving crap opinions over a bad film. (talk) 22:25, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm readdding with different text. There's a lot of bad reviews of this film with a cast that includes many of rock's royalty.-- (talk) 18:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
This movie has a 0% Rotten Tomatoes rating, but it based on only 5 reviews. That's far too small of a sample size. It wouldn't be a gre
  • Sproet 2 (Fleck 2) (2003) Viewers of Dutch pay TV moviechannel Film1 voted this movie as the worst movie ever made by a Dutchman - in this case director Ben Verbong. In the movie, the pixielike character Sproet can make wishes come true by pushing the flecks ('sproeten' in Dutch) on his body. In the same list, Adrenaline was voted second worst. The budget of this movie was so low that scenes had to be filmed in public locations, which was later explained by director Roel Reiné as being artistically relevant "guerrilla filming".
  • Super Mario Bros (film) (1993): An adaption of Super Mario Brothers video game, directed by Rocky Morton and Annabel Jankel. Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune and Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film two thumbs down on the television program Siskel & Ebert At the Movies, and the film was on their list for one of the worst films of 1993. Bob Hoskins spoke critically of Super Mario Bros., saying that it was "the worst thing I ever did" and that "the whole experience was a nightmare" in a 2007 interview with The Guardian. In another interview with The Guardian, Hoskins was asked, "What is the worst job you've done," "What has been your biggest disappointment," and "If you could edit your past, what would you change?" His answer to all three was Super Mario Bros. John Leguizamo also admitted in 2007 that he, too, disliked his role as Luigi in the film, and expressed dissatisfaction with the film's direction. He said in his biography that perhaps the reason why the film turned out the way it did was that the studio wanted a more family friendly film while the directors wanted it to be more adult-like. He also said that both he and Bob Hoskins did not enjoy working on the film, frequently getting drunk to go through it, knowing that it would turn out bad. Dennis Hopper was also disparaging of the production, "It was a nightmare, very honestly, that movie. It was a husband and wife directing team who were both control freaks and wouldn't talk before they made decisions. Anyway, I was supposed to go down there for five weeks, and I was there for 17. It was so over budget."
It's called the worst of the year, and the worst of some individual careers, it's also occasionally singled out as the worst video game movie, but none call it the worst ever made. LM2000 (talk) 21:00, 20 September 2015 (UTC)


  • Teenage Zombies (1958): Jerry Warren was a director in the early 1960s known for editing foreign films and making them into new movies by adding new footage filmed by himself. This is his second most famous, behind 1981's Frankenstein Island, which were films he actually made from scratch (he clearly did better bowdlerizing others' films). Appeared in the 2004 DVD documentary, The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made.
  • Town & Country (2001): This romantic comedy about life cost $90 million and pulled in $6.7 million at the box office. In his book, A Year at the Movies, Kevin Murphy cites it as the worst film of 2001.
More of a "bad in its release year" film. Bad box office and cite from the MST3K guy is simply not enough; needs more cites before being re-added. Dannybu2001 18:15, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Here we go again with epic fail citations. It still is not considered the worst movie ever made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:48, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Troll (1985): A horror/fantasy film with laughable special effects and a queer concept. As famously odd as its sequel, this film was included in the 2004 DVD documentary, The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made.
  • Troppo belli (2005): In Italy, the 2005 Italian comedy film is widely considered one of the worst films of all time. Aside from doing extremely poorly at the box office, Star Costantino Vitagliano won the Fiaschi d'oro award for worst actor, while it was nominated for several others.
    • Despite claims that it is "widely considered one of the worst of all time" no sources actually indicate this.LM2000 (talk) 01:01, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Tron (1982): Originally considered a flop, it is undergoing a critical re-evaluation by a later generation and has acquired a cult status (IMDB rating: 6.3/10).


  • Undiscovered (2005): Carrie Fisher and Ashlee Simpson starred in this 2005 movie which was not screened in advance for critics and only has a 5% positive rating at Rotten Tomatoes [34]. In its first weekend (August 26-28, 2005), its per-screen average was a mere $518. The second week, it set a dubious box office record by falling 86 percent - worse than the 82 percent suffered by Gigli in 2003. Critic Tom Long said: "All this silliness swirls around for about an hour and a half and then you get to leave the theater. Unless you're being held there at gunpoint. And really, that's about the only excuse for being in a theater watching this thing in the first place." [35]
Undiscovered may have flopped at the box office, but it had little hype to begin with.


  • Vampire In Brooklyn (1995): Starring Eddie Murphy in a pseudo-love story directed by horror guru Wes Craven. The film is generally regarded as uneven, combining the scares of a romance movie with the passion of a B-grade horror flick. It received an 8% rating at Rotten Tomatoes [36], and was additionally blighted by the death of Angela Bassett's stunt double on the set in a horrific fall.


  • Wolf Creek (2005): Based on a series of real events including murder, Wolf Creek was called one of the most violent and sadistic movies of all time. Film critic Roger Ebert gave it a rare zero stars out of four. He wrote; "There is a role for violence in film, but what the hell is the purpose of this sadistic celebration of pain and cruelty? There is a line and this movie crosses it. I don't know where the line is, but it's way north of Wolf Creek. I wanted to walk out of the theater and keep on walking." [37] One such reviewer did just that, Seattle Times critic Moira Macdonald, said she walked out of her first movie. She called watching the movie 'punishment' and wondered how someone's real death inspired this "entertainment".[38]
This film and its write-up are not up (or should I say, 'down'?) to the accepted standards of the purpose and scope of this article. Dannybu2001 06:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok, safe to say its not for everyone. Sure some people like it, but it's a small minority. Some people worship Alone in the Dark, Showgirls, Battlefield, Batman and Robin etc, and all of those are listed here. It was put under gratuitousness because it's just that, gratuitous. It was only made to show gore for no other reason that to show gore and blood. Not really anything else unlike most other horror movies. I saw it, I can deal with a "gorey" movie, but without any reason for it, its just watching a slaughterhouse. Don't worry, I'm not putting it back on, but thats my side.--The great grape ape is straight out of the know 05:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC)


  • xXx (2002): Action/thriller starring Vin Diesel, in what many seem to be one of his worst performances ever. Diesel plays a character who is summoned by an NSA employee to take down a terrorist organization in Europe. Among the critics and public, it is a controversial like/hate movie.


  • You Got Served (2004): This dance film went straight to the top (bottom?) of IMDb's worst 100 film list in the immediate aftermath of its release. The contrived plot, Lil' Kim's cameo, and incomprehensible dialogue were instantly spoofed in the South Park episode "You Got F*cked in the Ass".


  1. ^
  2. ^$_35.JPG
  3. ^ John Wilson. The Official Razzie Movie Guide. New York: Warner, 2005. 7-9
  4. ^ A*P*E at Retrieved 23 August 2007.
  5. ^ A*P*E at Retrieved 18 June 2009
  6. ^ An Alan Smithee Film Burn Hollywood Burn Box Office Mojo Retrieved 2011.07.23
  7. ^ "An Alan Smithee Film Burn Hollywood Burn". Retrieved 2011-01-17.
  8. ^ Cite error: The named reference eberthated was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  9. ^ Daigle, Ned. "Bad Movie Review: An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn". Retrieved 2007-10-13.
  10. ^ Siskel & Ebert At The Movies - Barb Wire
  11. ^ The Official RAZZIE Forum - 1996 Razzie Nominees & Winners
  12. ^ "Bio-Dome (1996)". Rotten Tomatoes. Flixster. Retrieved October 21, 2010.
  13. ^ "Worst-Reviewed Movies". Metacritic. CNET Networks Inc. Retrieved 2008-11-03.
  14. ^ "Bio-Dome". boxoffice.come. Retrieved 2013-05-26.
  15. ^ [1][dead link]
  16. ^ Cracknell, Ryan (July 13, 2002). "Bio-Dome". Archived from the original on November 2008. Retrieved 7 June 2013.
  17. ^ Awards for Bio-Dome on IMDb
  18. ^ "Timecode 7:30". Retrieved 2013-12-19.
  19. ^
  20. ^ BloodRayne at Metacritic
  21. ^
  22. ^ "The Cat in the Hat" at Rotten Tomatoes
  23. ^
  24. ^ 26th Annual Golden Raspberry (Razzie) nominations
  25. ^ Dirty Love at Rotten Tomatoes
  26. ^ a b Roger Ebert on Dirty Love
  27. ^ "Review" Dragonball Evolution". Anime News Network. March 16, 2009. Retrieved March 19, 2009.
  28. ^ Thompson, Luke (April 9, 2009). "Dragonball Evolution: A Surreal Mess". E! Online. Retrieved June 11, 2009.
  29. ^ Di Rosso, Jason (April 10, 2009). "Movietime - April 10, 2009 - Dragonball Evolution". Movie Time. ABC Radio National. Retrieved April 11, 2009.
  30. ^ Hillis, Aaron (April 10, 2009). "Dragonball Evolution: A Cartoonish Coming-of-Ager". The Village Voice. Retrieved April 18, 2009.
  31. ^ Castillo, Michelle (April 7, 2009). "Movies: 'Dragonball' star: 'No one wants to make a movie that people will hate'". L.A. Times. Retrieved January 23, 2010.
  32. ^
  33. ^
  34. ^
  35. ^
  36. ^,28804,1851626_1851846_1851645,00.html
  37. ^
  38. ^ Marcus, Dan. "3 reasons everyone hated the 'Fantastic Four' reboot". The Daily Dot. Retrieved 3 June 2017.
  39. ^ Todd McCarthy (August 5, 2015). "'Fantastic Four': Film Review". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved August 5, 2015.
  40. ^ Tim Grierson (August 4, 2015). "'Fantastic Four': Review". Screen Daily. Retrieved August 4, 2015.
  41. ^ Travers, Peter (August 6, 2015). "How bad is this reboot of Marvel's first superheroes? Worse than you can imagine". Rolling Stone. Retrieved August 11, 2015.
  42. ^ "The 10 Worst Movies of 2015". December 17, 2015. Retrieved March 10, 2016.
  43. ^ "The 10 worst movies of 2015 starring Fantastic Four, Jurassic World, Sisters and". December 29, 2015. Retrieved March 10, 2016.
  44. ^ Kiang, Jessica. "The 20 Worst Films Of 2015 | The Playlist". Retrieved March 10, 2016.
  45. ^ Ehrlich, David (December 21, 2015). "10 Worst Movies of 2015". Rolling Stone. Retrieved March 10, 2016.
  46. ^ Schneider, Steven. "'Fantastic Four' Has The Worst Rotten Tomatoes Rating For A Marvel Movie Since 'Elektra'". TechTimes. Retrieved 3 June 2017.
  47. ^ Smith, Troy L. (August 6, 2015). "'Fantastic Four' reboot may be the worst superhero movie of all time". The Plain Dealer. Retrieved August 18, 2015.
  48. ^ Hammond, Pete. "'Fantastic Four' Review: Epic Fail In Hollywood's Comic Book Universe". Deadline Hollywood. Retrieved 3 June 2017. I always try to find some level of good in even in the worst movies, but oh hell yes, and then some.
  49. ^ "Fantastic Four flop: the biggest superhero disaster since Catwoman". The Guardian. Retrieved 3 June 2017.
  50. ^ McClintock, Pamela. "'Fantastic Four' Gets Worst CinemaScore Ever for Studio Superhero Movie". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 3 June 2017.
  51. ^ Keyes, Rob (August 8, 2015). "'Fantastic Four' Is The Worst Reviewed Marvel Movie Ever". Screen Rant. Retrieved August 18, 2015.
  52. ^ "Fantastic Four (2015)". Rotten Tomatoes. Retrieved 3 June 2017.
  53. ^ Agard, Chancellor. "4 Key Reasons The 'Fantastic Four' Reboot Bombed At The Box Office". IBTimes. Retrieved 3 June 2017.
  54. ^ "fear dot com (Feardotcom) - Rotten Tomatoes". Rotten Tomatoes. Retrieved 29 October 2014.
  55. ^
  56. ^
  57. ^ Chicago Sun-Times movie reviews, June 1, 2007
  58. ^ Canby, Vincent (29 June 1990). "Ghost Dad (1990) Review/Film; When a Comedian Becomes an Institution". The New York Times. Retrieved 29 June 2015. line feed character in |title= at position 17 (help)
  59. ^ Rainer, Peter (29 June 1990). "MOVIE REVIEW : Cosby's TV Image Haunts 'Ghost Dad'". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 29 June 2015.
  60. ^ Ferguson, John. "Ghost Dad". Radio Times. Retrieved 29 June 2015.
  61. ^ Novak, Ralph (9 July 1990). "Picks and Pans Review: Ghost Dad". People. Retrieved 29 June 2015.
  62. ^ Boyar, Jay (29 June 1990). "'Ghost Dad' Is Transparent In Attempt To Be Entertaining". Orlando Sentinel. Retrieved 29 June 2015.
  63. ^ Ryan, Desmond (29 June 1990). "Cosby And Poitier Teamed Again In 'Ghost Dad'". Retrieved 29 June 2015.
  64. ^ King, Dennis (6 July 1990). "'Ghost Dad'". Tulsa World. Retrieved 29 June 1990. Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  65. ^ Creevy, Caitlin (13 July 1990). "`Ghost Dad` Is Frightfully Bad". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 29 June 2015.
  66. ^ Ghost Dad at Rotten Tomatoes
  67. ^ Bad Movie Planet Retrieved 2008-09-08
  68. ^ The Monster Shack Retrieved 2008-09-08
  69. ^ B-Movie Graveyard Retrieved 2008-09-08
  70. ^ "The Giant Claw" on
  71. ^
  72. ^
  73. ^
  74. ^
  75. ^
  76. ^
  77. ^ Cite error: The named reference Wilson 2005 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  78. ^ a b Godzilla. Metacritic. CNET Networks. Retrieved November 6, 2011.
  79. ^ Godzilla (1998). Rotten Tomatoes. IGN Entertainment. Retrieved November 6, 2011.
  80. ^ Wilson, John (August 23, 2000). "1998 Archive". Golden Raspberry Award. Retrieved November 6, 2011.
  81. ^ Cite error: The named reference Ebert was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  82. ^ Berardinelli, James (May 1998). Godzilla. ReelViews. Retrieved November 6, 2011.
  83. ^ Holden, Stephen (May 19, 1998). Godzilla (1998). The New York Times. Retrieved November 6, 2011.
  84. ^ Happily N'Ever After Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes
  85. ^ "Top 10 Worst Vanity Projects" [2]"
  86. ^
  87. ^
  88. ^
  89. ^
  90. ^
  91. ^
  92. ^
  93. ^
  94. ^ Frank Scheck (2013-03-22). "InAPPropriate Comedy: Film Review". The Hollywood Reporter. The Bottom Line: This painfully unfunny assemblage of would-be comedy sketches manages to make Movie 43 look good in retrospect.
  95. ^ "InAPPropriate Comedy (2013)". Rotten Tomatoes. Flixster.
  96. ^ Reed, Rex (15 September 2017). "'Mother!' Is the Worst Movie of the Year, Maybe Century". Observer. Retrieved 12 February 2018.
  97. ^ Smith, Kyle. "Jennifer Lawrence's Grotesque Spoof of the Nativity". National Review. Retrieved 12 February 2018.
  98. ^ Heaton, Michael (16 September 2017). "Darren Aronofsky's 'Mother!' is beneath contempt". The Plain Dealer. Retrieved 12 February 2018.
  99. ^ "Mother! of all flops: Jennifer Lawrence horror leads to walkouts, F grade from audiences". The Telegraph. 18 September 2017. Retrieved 12 February 2018.
  100. ^ Rife, Katie (22 January 2017). "The Razzies waste everyone's time by nominating Mother! and not The Snowman". The AV Club. Retrieved 12 February 2018.
  101. ^ Bradshaw, Peter (18 September 2017). "What the F? How Mother! joined the 'bad movie' club". The Guardian. Retrieved 12 February 2018.
  102. ^ Hertz, Barry (14 September 2017). "Review: Mother! is a once-in-a-lifetime film, whatever that means to you". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 12 February 2018.
  103. ^
  104. ^
  105. ^ Holds Barred
  106. ^ a b Angie Han (19 January 2016). "'Norm of the North' Is Already the Worst Reviewed Film of 2016". /Film. Retrieved 16 May 2017.
  107. ^ a b Amid Amidi (16 January 2017). "Every Single Movie Critic In North America Hated 'Norm of the North'". Cartoon Brew. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  108. ^ "Norm of the North (2016)". Rotten Tomatoes. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  109. ^ "Norm of the North reviews". Metacritic. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  110. ^ Katie Rife (14 January 2016). "Rob Schneider is somehow the least lazy part of Norm Of The North". The A. V. Club. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  111. ^ James White (14 March 2016). "Norm Of The North Review". Empire. Retrieved 16 May 2017.
  112. ^ Michael Rechtshaffen (14 January 2016). "Review 'Norm of the North' ploddingly follows in footsteps of 'Happy Feet'". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  113. ^ Mark Kermode (20 March 2016). "Norm of the North review – un-bearably dull animated Arctic saga". The Observer. The Guardian. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  114. ^ Glenn Kenny (14 January 2016). "Review: In 'Norm of the North,' a Polar Bear Takes a Stand". The New York Times. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  115. ^ Soren Andersen (14 January 2016). "'Norm of the North': a nonsensical bear of a comedy". The Seattle Times. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  116. ^ Jen Chaney (14 January 2016). "'Norm of the North' goes south, fast". The Washington Post. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  117. ^ Geoff Berkshire (14 January 2016). "Film Review: 'Norm of the North'". Variety. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  118. ^ a b Olivia Waring (22 January 2017). "Is Norm of The North the worst film of 2016 already?". Retrieved 17 May 2017.
  119. ^
  120. ^ Moore, Roger (November 23, 2009). "Movie Review: Old Dogs, no new tricks". Movies with Roger Moore. Orlando Sentinel. Retrieved 2009-11-24.
  121. ^
  122. ^ a b Rickey, Carrie (November 24, 2009). "Old Dogs". The Philadelphia Inquirer. Retrieved 2009-11-24.
  123. ^
  124. ^,35742/
  125. ^ Box Office Mojo - The Postman
  126. ^ Siskel & Ebert At The Movies - The Postman
  127. ^ ReelViews - The Postman
  128. ^ The Postman at Rotten Tomatoes
  129. ^ The Official RAZZIE Forum — 1997 Razzies Nominees & Winners
  130. ^ Redline at Rotten Tomatoes
  131. ^ Redline at the Internet Movie Database
  132. ^
  133. ^
  134. ^
  135. ^ audio commentary on The Petrified Forest DVD
  136. ^ Kenigsberg, Ben (November 13, 2014). "To Save Us All From Satan's Power", The New York Times. Retrieved December 28, 2014.
  137. ^ Kaufman, Scott (December 5, 2014). "The People Have Spoken! Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas Is IMDB's Worst Film of All Time". The Raw Story. Retrieved December 5, 2014.
  138. ^ Mauney, Matt (December 5, 2014). "Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas Officially Worst Movie in IMDb History". Orlando Sentinel. Retrieved December 5, 2014.
  139. ^ "RAZZIES® Celebrate 35 Years of Worst Achievements in Film with Inclusive Nominee List ...and New "Redeemer" Award". Golden Raspberry Award Foundation. Retrieved January 14, 2015.
  140. ^ "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen". Rotten Tomatoes. Retrieved June 26, 2009. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is a noisy, underplotted, and overlong special effects extravaganza that lacks a human touch.
  141. ^ "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)". Metacritic. Retrieved June 24, 2009.
  142. ^ Dargis, Manohla. "Movie Review - Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen - Invasion of the Robot Toys, Redux -". Retrieved 2009-06-24.
  143. ^ The Razzie award nominations, Oscar nominations announced
  144. ^ "Sandra Bullock wins TWO Razzie Awards; 'Transformers 2' nabs THREE". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 2010-03-07.
  145. ^
  146. ^ Current Movie Reviews, Independent Movies - Film Threat
  147. ^
  148. ^ Variety review of "Who's Your Caddy?"