About or year or so ago I put together a little op-ed piece, right around the time I first started writing for Flickering Myth. It was a piece I'd been mulling for a few years: The Five Most Disappointing Films of All Time. I wrote it up, submitted it, and moved on to my next random thought.
In the article's wake, a debate sprang up about my choices. Some agreed. Some disagreed, while others had their own ideas which films should have made the list. On the one year anniversary of the article I decided to revisit my brazen claims and discuss some of your choices in a piece I like to call:
Return of the Five Most Disappointing Films of All Time.
Who watched the Watchmen? Apparently, everybody....
Favorite quote:
"I think the author was just too lazy to find a fifth movie to blame so he picked that one. I thought Watchmen was great. " - Witchdoktor
First off, I learned that a lot of people really like Watchmen. A fact that still astonishes me. There is a very loud and very vocal fan base for the Watchmen film that I have alienated. And in truth, I have no problem with that. I went back and watched the film again to make sure I hadn't made some grievous error. The other four choices on my list were proudly championed as truly terrible. Watchmen was the one choice that seemed to really rub people the wrong way.
Upon another viewing, I decided that I was in fact right all along. Watchmen is a garish, terrible adaptation. Zack Snyder chokes the life out of the film one recreated panel at a time. The acting is wooden. The casting is shallow. And the film only exists to prove Alan Moore right in the fact that the story is best left on the printed panels and pages. I'm always open to the consideration of being incorrect on any number of subjects. However, on Watchmen, I feel satisfied with its inclusion on this list. The art of adaptation involves taking the source material and improving upon it. Not recreating it. Zack Snyder made a predictable adaptation, one with no surprises and brought nothing of his own to the source material. Disappointing. Twenty plus years of potential adaptations in the hands of people like Terry Gilliam and Paul Greengrass, and what we end up with is Zack Snyder pulling a cinematic version of obsessive compulsive disorder with his devotion to the original.
I was also shocked by the number of people who thought this was a "worst film of all time" list and who didn't understand the entire proposition of the article. These were supposed to be disappointments. Films with huge expectations that were eventually crushed by their shortcomings. I doubt any of these films would make my "worst of all time list", though The Phantom Menace is always flirting with that possibility.
Based on your reactions, here are your Top Five Most Disappointing Films of All Time:
_poster.jpg)
1. Planet of the Apes (2001)
Hard to argue. Tim Burton's reboot of the Apes franchise was a wretched, unintentionally hilarious mess. The only thing worse than the actors in awful ape make up were the awful actors not in ape make up. This movie is so terribly put together. A high budget blockbuster that fails at the most elementary levels. Tim Burton has always struggled with traditional mainstream filmmaking. His particular brand of whimsy didn't work all. And the film contains the most hilariously terrible cliffhanger ending ever.
So why wasn't it on the list?
I think the key word here is 'disappointing'. Sure, it's an awful film. Worthy of any derision and bile spewed in its general direction. But were the expectations that high? Were the original Planet of the Apes films so good that a horrible reboot seemed surprising? From my point of view, this film was highly anticipated but not with the same verve and excitement of the other five entries on the list.
2. Batman & Robin
Do I need to waste any more words on this epic failure? Like Apes, it's bad. Real bad. Tragically bad. I don't know if there's a word in the dictionary that can truly encompass how bad it is.
So why wasn't it on the list?
I always find Batman & Robin a funny proposition. Batman Forever came out two years earlier with many of the same flourishes employed by director Joel Schumacher. It was over the top, ambiguously strange, and prone to being campy. Batman Forever introduced Batman and Robin ass shots, Bat nipples, and catch phrase spewing villains who leaned more towards to ridiculous than the menacing. So when he pushed Batman & Robin even further into campy territory, why were people so surprised? I suppose that's the definition of 'The Most Disappointing'. Batman Forever set the tone for what was to come with Batman & Robin. So I wasn't exactly surprised. It wasn't expecting much after Batman Forever, and Schumacher delivered on those diminished expectations.
I mean, come on. Once you heard the words 'Arnold Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze', were you really expecting something great?
3. Superman Returns
It's funny how many of these films are comic/geek properties. Superman Returns was pretty bad. More shocking, really. How did Bryan Singer get the most iconic superhero of all time so wrong? His mopey version of Superman and bitchy version of Lois Lane were so off putting. What should have been the Man of Steel's triumphant return to cinemas turned into a $200 million movie about superhero paternity and Lex Luthor's weird obsession with real estate.
So why wasn't it on the list?
Once again I must cite previous films. After Superman III and Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, Superman was tainted goods. Yes, there was some real excitement behind Superman Returns in the build up to release, but it wasn't like the generational milestone of something like Star Wars. Now if Tim Burton had ever made Superman Lives, that probably would have made the list.
4. The Last Airbender
This one popped up a few times. Again, I have to stress I'm talking about the 'most disappointing films', not 'cinematic abominations', a list where this film deservedly belongs.
So why wasn't it on the list?
Apparently none of you saw Lady in the Water or The Happening. If you had any expectations that this movie was going to be good, you deserved to be disappointed.
5. The Matrix Reloaded
After the mad genius that was The Matrix, the Wachowskis took all the goodwill earned from it and doubled down on a pair of sequels that left audiences scratching their heads and generally confused. It was still a blend of over the top martial arts and high minded philosophy. Most people dreaded every scene that took place in the subterranean city of Zion and found that they didn't care for the expanded world of the Matrix.
So why wasn't on the list?
It's hard to not see the disappointment for the Matrix sequels, especially if you look at the financials. The Matrix Reloaded made $750 million worldwide. That's an impressive number. The Matrix Revolutions made $420 million. That's over $300 million worth of tickets shed between the two moves, which if you remember were only released six months apart.
Personally, I didn't think the Matrix sequels were as bad as some people made them out to be, though it would be impossible to suggest that they weren't epic disappointments. I would almost be willing to indulge that the Matrix sequels could take the place of Watchmen.
Other Films Mentioned:
Alien 3
You're on crack. Alien 3 is awesome. Fincher is amazing. And I'll go one further.
Alien 3 > Aliens.
That might be a poke to the hornet’s nest.
Every Harry Potter film
The first two Harry Potter films are terrible. But from Alfonso Cuaron's third installment forward, this was a pretty solid series. At almost a billion dollars per entry, I'd have a hard time buying that there was any disappointment.
The Lost World: Jurassic Park
Pretty mediocre. A little deflating after the classic original. But I wouldn't put it in the top five.
So there we have it my friends. Five more major disappointments based on reader feedback. Surely the debate will continue...
Anghus Houvouras
I was with you all the way until you said Alien 3 is better than Aliens! It's a dreadful movie, completely lacking in suspense with a motley crew of desperately uninteresting characters.
ReplyDelete"Alien 3 is awesome. Fincher is amazing." If your last post didn't destroy your credibility, this statement has. Even Fincher (whom I respect very much for Fight Club and Se7en) admits that it was horrible. He can't even bring himself to talk about it. Sure, some good parts, but overall, The ALIEN canon stops with ALIENS. Which couldn't POSSIBLY be worse than Alien 3, as you stated. ALIENS is, in many ways (not all) better than ALIEN. Ridley gave us the main story, the atmosphere (with the help from Giger), great cinematography. Cameron gave us memorable characters, with a lot of character development, action, suspense, a decent story, immortal one-liners, and generally made the xenomorph much more believable, more menacing. What did Fincher do? He gives us one thing, an interesting character, Clemens. And then, out of the blue, he kills him, not even halfway through the movie. Just like that. Okay, that could be original, but he basically leaves us with some half baked, one and a half dimensional uninteresting cast, to a cheesy, disappointing conclusion. As far as ALIEN 4 goes, we don't talk about that. Jeunet just had some fun, but he should have not included it in the franchise, but made it a spin off, called "Le fabuleux destin d'Ellen Ripley"
ReplyDeletei think i'm feeling a "In defense of Alien 3" piece coming on.....
ReplyDeleteFairly scathing, but too right in too many areas to allow a comment like Aliens 3 > Aliens to upset me. Phantom Menace was a hot mess, and I said it the first time I saw it. My friends argued with me about it, and I accused them all of being so desperate for new Star Wars that they would accept George Lucas's heavy breathing for 90 minutes if that's what he released. The entire prequel trilogy was crap. Even the third one, which I would argue is the best of the three. Too much technology, no story. The guy that played anakin was little better than a wooden dummy. It was like watching Al Gore. I think the bar is so low for JJ Abrams on Episode 7 that he could basically take a big dump compared to his other work and it will still be better than Ep. 1 - 3. Lucas had all the stars aligned for 1 - 3, but gave us Jar Jar, pod racing, and midichlorians. Darth Maul was the best part of the first movie, and he only had about 45 seconds of screen time.
ReplyDeleteCan't argue with the other entries. I wish people would listen to Alan Moore. He's not been wrong yet. The only even halfway decent movie version of his work was 300, and I'm still torn between calling it a great action movie and calling it the funniest men's fitness movie I've ever seen. It rides the razor's edge between great and complete camp.
The only movies on the new list that I think fit the bill for disappointments are the Matrix sequels, because we had so many reasons to expect more based on the first movie. The others were all made by folks or continuations of franchises that had already set a very low bar. Did anyone really expect the Ape movie to be good? Marky Mark and monkey suits? Really?
"The Matrix Revolutions" is much, much worse than "The Matrix Reloaded". Good choice for #2: "Batman and Robin" is so bad that George Clooney will actually pull out his wallet and refund your money if you happen to meet him and tell him you saw it in the theater.
ReplyDeleteAliens 3 better than Aliens? Now you're just messing with us. While not the abomination that Aliens 4 was, Fincher forgot that you actually have to care about the charact. After ruining the ending of Aliens in the first five minutes, Aliens 3 kills off the one remaining sympathetic character in the first 20. Who are we supposed to care about after that? Angry, suicidally depressed Ripley? Largely faceless rapist and murderer monks?
ReplyDeleteThis writer is terrible. He needs to be fired.
ReplyDeleteThe first two HP films are MUCH closer to the books than the later entries. Chris Columbus knew how to put the sparkle and wonder in the Wizarding World. The later films were dank, dreary, murky messes visually and many of the better character moments were excised unwisely.
ReplyDeleteI admire your passion about the awfulness of Watchmen and your firm stance on Alien 3, which I don't think was nearly as bad as people say it is. But I do have to say, The Matrix Reloaded and Indiana Jones 4 both get a bum rap... Were they disappointing? Maybe a little, but how easy is it to impress after gems like The Matrix and The Last Crusade? I think TMR and KotCS were fun, entertaining, silly, enjoyable escapes. Now I'm not one of those people who generally defends terrible movies by saying "It's just a movie, you're not meant to think too hard about it." The Phantom Menace is painfully bad, there's not sugarcoating that. Batman and Robin was laughable. But I was actually on board with the first Matrix sequel, and as for Crystal Skull... I dunno. I had fun with the silliness, nuked fridge and all. Plus now I know that if I'm ever attacked by giant fire ants, I can just crush them with my knees.
ReplyDeleteAn adaptation should not have to improve upon the source material, especially in the case of 'books to film'. To Kill A Mockingbird is a fantastic movie based on a fantastic book but its a terrible adaptation in that it leaves out many of the key elements that made the story work. Of course you can't squeeze that much story into 2 hours, but you're not supposed to and that's what's so difficult about (comic) book adaptations. Something will always be left out and chances are its just as important as what was put in. Its almost impossible to IMPROVE on something already understood to be great.
ReplyDeleteGrow some cajones and put The Dark Knight Rises on the list. I'm just saying what a lot of other people are thinking and I'll take it a step further. Batman Begins was mediocre at best, boring at worst. The Dark Knight only made that much money BECAUSE HEATH LEDGER DIED! I'll go as far as calling it a Warner Brothers conspiracy to ensure a return on their investment. It was easily the best of the Nolan trilogy, but Heath Ledger's scenes were the only parts worth watching. The same with TDKR, the whole movie was spent thinking 'where's Bane?' or 'what's Bane going to do next?' not 'this is the Catwoman I wanted to see' or 'yes, Gotham city is the slums now!'. Disappointing indeed.
ReplyDeleteI wish they had gone with their original plan and JUST made Matrix Reloaded and combined the sequels into one film. Greed helps nobody.
ReplyDeleteWritten well before The Dark Knight Rises I'm afraid.
ReplyDeleteSometimes it's necessary to "improve" the text of the book to best showcase the spirit of the book. Peter Jackson did an excellent job of capturing the "magic" of LOTR, but to do so he had to linnear-ize the narrative and prune a bunch of deadwood (such as Tom Bombadill).
ReplyDeleteAnd sometimes there's an interesting IDEA in the book that only works out when you re-develop it. I saw both "Watchmen" and "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen". Watchman was faithful to the tone of the original, and it sucked great big ones. LXG took the basic concept and made a more conventional action/hero movie that was far superior to the nasty, cynical original.
While LXG may have been superior to its source material (with which I am unfamiliar) I thought the film itself was just plain silly, like most steampunk inevitably ends up being. From what I've come to understand the makers of LXG made a bland movie that appealed to jocks ("American style" and "is that a f*cking car?") and spoke to nerds (every literary reference).
ReplyDeleteWatchmen was a bit too ambitious as far as sticking with the tone of the book. The problem is the same one I bring up with To Kill A Mockingbird, too many ingredients for one pot of soup. If you can make it through the entire, full, uncut, director's, bonus, extra, complete version then you'll get an experience like no other. Its more than a regular movie and it TAKES more than a regular movie experience to get the point across, which is why it doesn't really work for conventional people.
300 was written by Frank Miller.
ReplyDeleteWow, I completely agree with everything you said, Anghus. VERY well done.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the article. I don't agree with everything (who can?) but I agree with most, and overall, its written well enough that I respect the opinions.
ReplyDelete-Agreed 1000% on Watchmen. And I can't deny the reader suggestions, which are arguably even more disappointing than your original list, which was basically perfect. Except Matrix Reloaded. I'd say its better than the first Matrix. I'd swap that for X3 The Last Stand. For the love of the first two, the hope that it could still be good, and some impressive marketing, that one is easily in my top 10 disappointments ever.
-I feel the exact reverse about Harry Potter. I love the first movie. That got me into checking the books out. The kids were adorable. The innocence and imagination of that fantasy ignited the child in me. As they got older, the acting got worse, the stories got rushed to fit into their movies, and they whole thing just became tiresome and dragged out. Yates in particular was more interested in cinematography than telling stories that made sense.
Dude, you can't say Aliens 3 is better than Aliens and expect your credibility to not take a hit. I appreciate the boldness though. I also understand your beef with Watchmen, but I don't understand how it's a bad thing. It was so much better than it could have been and I really can't imagine a better film adaptation. And you know why? Because Snyder was faithful to the source material. How often do critics get pissed over "creative additions?" He directed the movie he wanted to direct as far as I can tell. And he wanted to direct Watchmen, not Watchman remix
ReplyDeleteFinally, Alien 3 is a great movie. I wouldn't say it was better than Aliens but a damn solid movie none the less.
ReplyDeleteDisagree with the first two Potter films. They perfectly captured the innocence of the first two books before things got noticeably more serious in the third. Also, the sixth movie was an abomination in terms of accurately conveying what was in the book.
ReplyDeleteI think the live action dragonball movie should be number one on this list
ReplyDeletePROMETHEUS !!!! So disappointing. I still vomit in my mouth thinking about it.
ReplyDeleteAliens 3 was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Most of the movie was so dark and shot with cheap "extreme closeups" during all the action that you could not tell what was going on! The characters were flat, uninteresting and the movie lacked any kind of scares or thrills. Aliens was the very best of the Alien sequals!
ReplyDeleteAgreed 100%!!
ReplyDeleteI see a pattern in how the Author's mind works. He has been institutionalized by Hollywood, is what I think. He thinks the Watchmen was disappointing because it was a frame by frame adaptation (which it wasn't, and Zack Snyder got flack for changing the ending the way he did). He also thinks the Harry Potter movies, from the third movie onwards, were good. If he had ever to read the books, he would know how untrue this is about the last 3 movies, especially, the last 2 movies of the franchise. Whilst the last 2 books in the series were dark, the movies removed all of that darkness and turned them into fluffy teenage-issue bullshit. But the author thinks that as long as the movie departed from the source material, they are good adaptations. He is clearly not right in this...at all. Fans need a faithful adaptation. Not every piece of literature has to be changed for the heck of it. A good adaptation is one where the changes do not take away from the source material, but adjust it to fit a reasonable screen time. Case in point, Fight Club.
ReplyDeleteGREEN LATERN COME ON THAT MOVIE SUCKED!!!!
ReplyDeleteWatchmen and Superman Returns have similar problems in that they're sluggishly paced, but neither of them are bad nor were they disappointing (at least to me). Superman had a depth that comic book movies almost never exhibit and Kevin Spacey was a brilliant Lex Luthor.
ReplyDeleteI think the Adam West batman tv show was a higher quailty of batman than any of the schumaker movies in every way possible, thats righ i said it "in every way possible".
ReplyDeleteI must disagree with your assessment of Last Airbender, with the source material M Night had to work with, the film should have a been a cakewalk for any director(even one as inept as Mr Shyamalan) to create something decent. That was why I feel the film was a huge disappointment.
ReplyDeleteI feel that Aliens and Alien 3 were equally fantastic. The forth installment was the worst but it was immensely enjoyable for its camp appeal.
By the authors own logic, Alien 3 was a disappointment. Alien 2 gave us 2 pretty cool characters and the possibility of more story including them. Instead, those 2 characters are killed off. Realistic (as far as a movie about a space bug could be)? Yes. Disappointing? Hell yes.
ReplyDeleteWatchmen was disappointing mostly to the Moore fanatics but for most others it was a good film(except for those told by their Moore fanatic friends that it was the best story ever). In my opinion the film actually improved upon the comic, especially the climax. The blue squid never sat right when everyone in the story is all a-quiver about the Docs "power" not his ability to conjure up tentacled beasts.
You totally got it right about the Watchmen movie. What is so wrong about sticking to the source material? It's when filmmakers change and warp the source material to what they want to see that ends up making a terrible comic adaptation. I'll even give you an example. The upcoming Superman movie is gonna be terrible. Why? Because it's supposed to be a dark interpretation of the character. Superman is not supposed to be dark! He is not Batman! What Christopher Nolan did with the Batman franchise was great (except for the villans: Ra's Algul? Really? Sucked. The Joker wasn't nearly demented enough. And Bane was just laughable all the way thru the movie. Catwoman was cute, tho Michelle Pfeiffer played that character WAY better in Batman Returns.), but turning Superman darker? That is going to be a horrible adaptation of the character. At least Superman IV stuck to who the character actually is.
ReplyDeleteSuperman Returns and the Matrix sequeals were not bad. I liked them a lot, actually. And as for the Harry Potter films, the only thing wrong with them is that they were too short. But at the same time, nobody except for die-hard fans would want to sit thru a 12-hour+ Harry Potter movie where every scene in the book is acted out. That's the same thing when it comes to books being made into movies. Ya can't have every scene and every line of dialogue acted out. Not if you want people to see the movie so that you can make money, anyway.
ReplyDeleteI found the first two HP films to be extremely boring especially compared to the latter movies.
ReplyDeletealiens 3 = great aliens 3>aliens?? ur on crack homie
ReplyDeleteRight on!
ReplyDeleteAgreed 100% with you bro! Especially the part where the author has been institutionalized by Hollywood. Look out for Evil Dead.
ReplyDeleteYou can't say Aliens 3 is better than Aliens and expect your credibility to not take a hit. Anghus Houvouras, you should be fired!
ReplyDeleteRemove Ripley. She didn't need to be in that film. Add a character or two to root for/sympathize with and whammo! A....better film? Hmmmm....now that I think of it, it would've been a revamp of The Thing. Think about it. It even started out with a dog!
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I think it could've been better that way. The scenes with the dog Aliens chasing them down the corridors was pretty cool anyway.
My sentiments exactly. OMG. I nearly spewed my coffee when I read that. In one nonsensical sentence he negated everything, EVERYTHING, he said before it. Now I'm doubting everything he says and just throwing all his sentiments into the crapper. I know he's just speaking for himself but...Ugh!
ReplyDeleteWhat irritated me is when the author took the assumption that because the director attempted to do something that you never see which is an authentic adaptation of the graphic novel that it's something bad and worthy of name calling and harsh criticism How many books have you read and when Hollywood decided to make a movie it pretty much completely rewrote it based on time constraints and what looks good on camera? Personally I loved Watchmen and have watched it several times and each time I appreciate it more.
ReplyDeleteYou say Superman Returns was tainted goods yet you're "shocked" at how bad this movie is about the "most iconic superhero of all time." Seems it should have made the list.
ReplyDeleteThe first 2 HP films do capture the innocence of the books, which are about children, so it's hard for me to expect an adult to think they're terrific.
Still disagree w/ Watchmen being on the list. Watchmen was and always has been a difficult graphic novel to adapt. Patrick Wilson was outstanding as Nite Owl.
Yeah, I would change the Matrix sequels for Watchmen. Watchmen wasn’t that disappointing. The lighting was weird and they made some of the characters more violent than they used to be (in the book, Silk Spectre and Nite Owl are sort of counter-characters to Rorschach because the latter has killed a handful of times—in the film, the duo kills a bunch of knot-tops in a grotesque way, poking fingers through their necks).
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that Alien 3, even though Fincher disavows the film after studio trouble, is still without a doubt better than Aliens!
In fact, I like all four of the original films. Alien Resurrection has one scene/character that everyone (rightly) hates, the “newborn” but other than that I really like it—and it was my first encounter with the uneven but sometimes miraculously good Joss Whedon.
Out of the six Star Wars films released so far, two are good. The original, and Empire—and the latter ends on a cliff hanger.
ReplyDeleteI like those two films so much that their goodness, and my love for that world, spills over to a bunch of expanded universe stuff including the other films. I’m not sure which is worse out of Sith (“younglings”) and Jedi (I hate the slave clothes. I hate that the one female main character (Mon Mothra aside) is always captured, tortured, degraded). Clones and Menace are of course the worst of them all.
Check out my geek movie blogs at www.thepeoplesmic.blogspot.com - I will be reviewing Iron Man 3 on Saturday.
ReplyDelete