The Year's Worst Movies: A List

I figure, with us at the tail end of 2008 now, I'd start working on those obligatory year-end lists. However, I'm still a few films short of being able to do my Best of 2008, that'll be coming next week. What I do feel comfortable writing on, having seen over 100 films released this year, is the worst films of the year, as I don't think most of the Oscar bait coming out will be terrible enough to make the cut. So, without further explanation, my Ten Worst Films of 2008


Special Award: The Happening

Now, here's the thing. Is "The Happening" one of the worst movies of the year? Without a doubt. Therein lies a dilemma for me, though; as god-awful as it was, I've wanted to watch it time and time again. The film has transcended being bad, to the point that it's a must-see film in that audaciously bad, "Troll 2" sort of way. I can't rank it as one of the year's worst, because honestly, I look more fondly on my viewings of it more than I do for a lot of the films I saw. As an illustration of my point, enjoy:



10. W.

You might think it strange that such an acclaimed movie made my "Worst" list, but I thoroughly believe that said acclaim came from a bunch of super-liberal film critics who found this film an absolute revelation. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to play politics; I'm moderate across the board, and I voted for Barack. The fact is that when you remove topicality from the equation, you have a movie that may as well have been called "Satire For Dummies." Josh Brolin fails to infuse George W. Bush with the same humanity that Frank Langella gave to Richard Nixon in "Frost/Nixon," but that's no fault of his. The fault lies with the script, which basically draws everybody but Colin Powell as a bunch of bumbling idiots out of the Three Stooges. For as edgy as this film seems to think it is, "Saturday Night Live" covered all this territory already, and a hell of a lot better. The coup d'etat, though, is director Oliver Stone's attempts to delve into Bush's daddy issues and amoral history in order to make him sympathetic. Even worse, critics believed that he succeeded. This movie is about as even-handed as "JFK," and I'd really like to meet the people who said that this film was fair, so that I can get a good look at just how far up their asses their heads are.

9. RockNRolla

I can't express enough how truly, deeply sad I am to have to put this film on this list. I wanted it to be Guy Ritchie's post-Madonna return to form, the confirmation that "Revolver" was just an unfortunate aberration. I don't know what happened, but the frenetic energy that seemed to be on the verge of ripping straight out of his earlier films is completely gone, replaced with the kind of dull, laborious plotting that populates dime-a-dozen crime films. Gerard Butler and Toby Kebell do their best to elevate the film, but there's no redeeming a script that takes over half the running time to establish the story, and on top of that talks down to the audience, giving us fifteen-minute scenes of expository dialogue to make sure we don't get lost along the way. Though it's not the year's worst movie, it might be the most disappointing. Then again, there's #3...

8. The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian

I can only remember two things about "Prince Caspian":

1.) At some point, a CGI grizzly bear appears in the middle of multiple pivotal scenes, without having any reason for being there. I laughed my ass off.
2.) There was a couple sitting in front of me that I'm pretty sure were fucking in the theater, thinking they were being discreet about it.

I can't recall a single other detail, other than my thoughts immediately after the film that it was nothing but a laborious, instantly forgettable "Lord of the Rings" for children. I think that says it all.

7. Stop-Loss

When I was done watching "Stop-Loss," I was moved to remember Danny Boyle's 2007 misfire "Sunshine," which was a phenomenal film that was turned into an awful one by a terrible plot twist late in the film. The same thing happened with this film, but on an even greater level. For two-thirds or so of its running time, "Stop-Loss" is a compelling look at the moral issues present within the titular law, which states that those enlisted in the military can have their required time of duty extended without warning, and must accept this or face the full penalty of law. The film has the conviction to say that sometimes, running is justified if you've been screwed by the system. However, without warning or any plot provocation, the film completely cops out, and ends with the final idea that there is nothing more important than doing what you're told to do, even if you don't want to and even if it may very well get you killed. If the film had adequately built to this conclusion, it would have worked; as it stands, it seems like the studio told director Kimberly Pierce that she could make an anti-war movie, as long as the overall purpose was rah-rahing patriotism. If you can see the logic in that, please explain it to me.

6. Sukiyaki Western Django

The idea is fantastic: A spaghetti Western with an all-Asian cast. The execution...well, frankly, execution implies that something was accomplished. As it stands, Takashi Miike (director of a number of stomach-churning J-horror films, including "Audition) apparently though the best way to run with this premise was to teach his stars English phonetically, and in Southern accents. Because of this, you feel like the English-language film needs subtitles, just to help you wade through the awkward speech patterns. Worse still, for a Western, there's next to no action, just a lot of talk about rival gangs, roses and a woman who knows karate. The whole film feels like it's about an hour longer than it is, and rather than being excited, or at least campily amused, you're just staring at your watch, wondering when the whole debacle will come to an end. When Quentin Tarantino gives the best performance in a film, you know something has gone terribly, terribly wrong.

5. Hancock

If you've already seen "Hancock," do me a favor. Go online and find the original script, titled "Tonight, He Comes" (which would have been the best movie title in history, but I digress) and read it. You'll see how great this movie could have been before however many polarized forces got involved and ripped it apart. Watching this, I could tell that studio executives had quite a bit to do with the production and cutting of this film; only people with no proper training could have edited this movie this poorly. The film is half comedy and half dark, philosophical superhero drama, and I've made it sound a lot more intriguing than it ends up being. They awkwardly and without warning switch from the first style to the second, and try to do both in less than 90 minutes of running time. The result is an awkward, jumbled mess, a waste of a charismatic star capable of making this character iconic with a better script, and a major letdown given how good this film could have, and should have, been.

4. 10,000 B.C.

I love "The Day After Tomorrow," without a hint of irony. It's an incredibly fun, if scientifically hideous, disaster epic that I'll watch every time it's on TV. Apparently, that film's director, Roland Emmerich, decided that he would lose his sense of humor, and for that matter his goddamn mind, for his follow-up, "10,000 B.C." Apparently, at that particular era in time, slaves were building pyramids, jungles were located directly next to vast deserts, and the best way to stop a sabertooth tiger from disemboweling you was to ask it not to do so. Oh, and the big villain, hidden until the end of the film, looks like an evil, possessed shower curtain, with long fingernails. This is clearly the stuff nightmares are made of. I was hoping this film would be so bad it was good. It was just bad.

3. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

This movie is the cinematic equivalent of depression. It acts like it has some spark, puts on a facade so that everybody else won't worry about it, but as soon as you're with it long enough, you know it just wants to be dead. Watching "Crystal Skull," I couldn't help but wonder if anybody involved in the making of it gave a shit whatsoever, outside of everybody needing money in these strained economic times. The film seems content to fly by solely on nostalgia, throwing in Shia LeBeouf to make it relevant to a younger audience. Now, as likable a man as Shia is, when you're depending on him to save the fourth installment of one of the all-time legendary film franchises, a franchise George Lucas is a part of, something's not right. Maybe Lucas is the problem, though. I can understand why he felt compelled to do this film, for what it's worth; he didn't quite kill "Star Wars" enough with the idiotic "Don't jump or I'm going to fuck you up with my lightsaber" scene at the end of "Revenge of the Sith," so he needed to do more damage to everybody's childhoods. Thus, a woman being killed by knowledge and a UFO buried in Mayan ruins. Epic fail.

2. Semi-Pro

A bad movie is a bad movie, but a bad comedy is arguably worse, just because you're cringing at how painfully unfunny it is. A bad Will Ferrell movie is the next step down the ladder, because he and his casts never fail to swing violently for the fences. Sometimes it works, as with "Anchorman," and sometimes you get the cinematic equivalent of afterbirth, which is what happens here. There is literally not one laugh in the film's hour and a half running time, mostly owing to the fact that the script seems like it was written by twelve year olds. The film mistakes long streams of profanity for comedy, frequently; there's a scene set around a game of poker that's so terribly put together that it leaves the audience sitting in a seat, wondering where the nearest sharp object is so they can destroy both the screen and themselves, so that they won't have to live with knowing they paid to see this godforsaken movie.

1. Funny Games

Since April, this piece of crap was going to be at the top of this list. I knew as soon as I left the theater that, no matter how many more movies I saw this year, nothing could possibly be worse. Lo and behold, nothing was. I won't recap all my thoughts on this film (look in the archive to the right of this article, under "April 2008," for my original review,) but I will say that in reflection, the film was nothing more than a slap in the face to people who don't "get" art. My only additional thought is that I do often worry about the American moviegoing public, and the films they pay to see. I've never been prouder of humanity than when even critics met this vile, sadistic, nihilistic, hopeless, pretentious, supposedly provocative affront to cinema with complete indifference. A film this awful doesn't warrant discussion.