The 100 Worst List in General Horror and Sci-Fi Forum

0 Points

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

The 100 Worst List

Author	Comment
LCranston		#81	[-]
Jun 14 12 7:16 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Not sure I can think of ten just now (like others, I think I've forgotten ones that are truly terrible). Some I can think of came off a "50 Chilling Classics" collection ("Classics" - haha!) METAMORPHOSIS - the director watched the pilot episode of the 70s Incredible Hulk and ripped it off to tell a story about a guy who ultimately turns into a dinosaur. A six foot dinosaur. LEGEND OF BIGFOOT - some woodsy guy took a whoooollle lot of nature footage, and then decided to tie it all together with narration about looking for bigfoot (or is bigfoot looking for him!?!?!?). Worst moment - the guys wife runs over a squirrel (kills it), and the squirrel's mate tries pulling it to safety. Really out of place scene. OASIS OF THE ZOMBIES - poorly shot, acted & "written." Worse than ZOMBIE LAKE, but not by much. Agree with VAN HELSING & LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN. MONSTER A-GO-GO & CREEPING TERROR, yep, just awful. (Amarok, you said about CREEPING TERROR: "it holds a strange fascination that makes me watch it whenever it shows up on TV." HOW OFTEN DOES THIS HAPPEN?!) Saw some movie on pay cable, recent, independent, shot on crappy cameras ("DEAD"- something). A bunch of armed quasi-marines are sent into a huge building to rescue some people trapped there, but get killed off one by one by an unseen monster. The "twist" is that, after they're all killed, we see ANOTHER team sent in to rescue trapped people. It's all a test!!! Then of course there's FEEDERS, which can be enjoyable in a "bunch of friends & bunch of beers" kinda way. Non-genre, a Christopher Walken film called McBAIN - one of the few films I ever walked out on. Deep water is dark and restful and full of peace.
	Remove this ad
jamesenstein31		#82	[-]
Jun 17 12 3:16 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	METAMORPHOSIS plays like a low-rent version of Cronenberg's THE FLY. The conclusion is just plain ludicrous.
Rick		#83	[-]
Jun 24 12 2:26 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I've seen lots and lots of unbelievably dreadful movies, but, thankfully, they've been spread out over the 55 years that I've been watching horror movies. But just in the last 4 days I've encountered two more that are just about as bad as any I've ever endured. What have I done to deserve this? SATAN'S CHILDREN...is a homegrown effort, "home" in this case being Florida. It's not only an utterly inept piece of filmmaking, it's in bad, even scummy, taste. And it manages that without real nudity or effective gore. There is not just rape, but it's also semi-incest. There's homosexual rape, but, in case that's too mild, it has to be a gang-rape. There's lesbianism, but that's not enough either--the lesbians are unattractive, for God's sake! Matter of fact, the whole cast is pretty un-pretty, even those who parade around in underwear or bathing suits. The leading man is evidently supposed to be somewhere between 16 and 19, but he looks like a skinny 14-year-old -- a redhead with a really silly '70s haircut. And he spends way way too much of the movie wearing only his tighty whities. The whole movie has that creepy sort of underage feel to it. We got supremely lousy acting, writing, directing, editing...just about everything. If the movie had been edited in an even somewhat professional manner, this 90 minute thing would have come in at about 40 minutes. And I'm not talking here about editing the lousy footage out because then you'd have a zero minute movie. I'm just talking about cutting the long pauses where actors wait and wait before saying their next line. I'm talking about the long, lingering shots on doorways and open spaces while we wait for someone to enter the room or fill the space. Yeah, this is real bad. ATTACK OF THE BEAST CREATURES... maybe it's not as bad a title as ATTACK OF THE THE EYE CREATURES, but...Beast Creatures? Seems there's a problem with the zoological nomenclature. Kinda redundant, ain't it? And just what is a beast creature? For the first half of the movie we don't get a good look at 'em thanks to lots of quick cuts, jiggly camerawork, shaky lights... we can tell that they have red faces and glowing eyes, but we're not sure just what they are. Sometimes I thought they were actors with red makeup, sometimes they seemed to be red-faced Zuni dolls, sometimes they looked more like other sorts of dolls, as if lifted from the collection of an 8-year-old girl. The first time we get any kind of decent look at one, it's a dead beast creature and looks like a flattened overripe tomato with white button eyes. Then, unfortunately, at the halfway point of the movie, the filmmakers decided to start giving us long lingering looks at their beast creatures. Sometimes in repose, sometimes in ...umm... "action." Turns out they are sort of Zuni-ish, but minus the scariness. And the lack of fearsomeness is more than matched by their utter, stiff immobility. It's difficult to imagine a less effective set of monsters. But the filmmakers show them so much in the second half that they actually seem proud of them. It should be noted that the cast does include a couple of really good screamers, one of them a man. The most shocking thing about the movie is that the acting is so horrendous that when one of the ladies actually plays a couple of scenes with some measure of basic adequacy, it's a jolt. Both movies are viewable on YouTube. Here are the links... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xw1wmDHjtN8 http://www.youtube.com/wa...1-N4&feature=related Please note: I am not -- repeat, NOT -- recommending anyone watch these movies. Matter of fact, I suggest you don't. But I know that I wouldn't pay attention to such warnings, so I present these links as some sort of sick public service. Proceed at your own risk. But just in case you're gonna watch just to see those red-faced varmints, I'll save you the trouble. Behold...the BEAST CREATURE!!! You're welcome.
Frankensteinhead		#84	[-]
Jun 29 12 2:36 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Over the last couple of days I watched SATANS CHILDREN and ATTACK OF THE BEAST CREATURES. Firstly I can't thank Rick enough for bringing these two golden entertainments into my life.Which one is worse? They're both supremely awful in different ways. SC really is one of the worst films I can think of; poorly executed and morally reprehensible. The quicksand scene is perhaps the worst of its kind that I've ever seen. IMDB says that the quicksand is actually porridge, and victims have to lie down in it to make it look like their sinking, which it never does look like. Then there's the actual plot about that wimpy kid getting taken in by kindly Satanists after being gang raped by gays. Good thing those Satanists came along. AOTBC starts with a stupid title and goes downhill from there. This is the sort of thing that I used to play with my imaginary friends in the backyard when I was 6. Pointless, pointless movie that lets the viewer find out where sulpheric acid comes from; there are vast lagoons of it on islands in the North Atlantic. Anyways, a great big thanks to Rick for posting those links, but I have one question for you big guy. I know why I watched these movies; whatever possesed you to watch them?
	Remove this ad
Rick		#85	[-]
Jun 29 12 2:42 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	whatever possesed you to watch them? Short answer -- I'm not well. Basically, I'm one of those sad individuals known as "completists." I decided when I was very young that I was gonna see EVERY horror, s-f, or fantasy film ever made. I realized years ago that this is not possible, but that doesn't mean I can give it up. I deserve pity, not scorn. I can't help myself!!!
jamesenstein31		#86	[-]
Jun 30 12 2:43 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Rick wrote: whatever possesed you to watch them? Short answer -- I'm not well. Basically, I'm one of those sad individuals known as "completists." I decided when I was very young that I was gonna see EVERY horror, s-f, or fantasy film ever made. I realized years ago that this is not possible, but that doesn't mean I can give it up. I deserve pity, not scorn. I can't help myself!!! Perhaps, perhaps you are afflicted, too!
gene phillips		#87	[-]
Jun 30 12 2:58 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'm adding Dario Argento's 1998 PHANTOM OF THE OPERA to my list of the worst. The really bad ones are those that aren't the least bit fun. I pity the poor actors trapped in this thing. NATURALISTIC! UNCANNY! MARVELOUS!
Rick		#88	[-]
Jun 30 12 8:47 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	As a native of the Louisville area, I was proud and excited to find that someone was making homegrown horror movies. Then I actually saw one of them. ASYLUM OF SATAN is certainly, unequivocally deserving of a dishonored place on any list of Worst Horror Movies. Or Worst Any-Kind-Of Movies. Director Girdler also made THREE ON A MEATHOOK, ABBY, GRIZZLY, THE MANITOU... and died at a young age in a helicopter crash while location scouting. I saw ASYLUM OF SATAN in its premiere engagement, and, oh lord, was it awful. Just...just abysmal. I was taking a college film class at the time and our prof, who knew nothing of cheap horror films, and not a lot about any films, thought he scored a coup by getting one of ASYLUM's actors, Claude Fulkerson, to speak to our class. Poor Claude. He probably thought he would be greeted as some sort of celebrity, some sort of movie star. Unfortunately, the only person in class who had any questions for him was the only person in class who'd seen that atrocious movie -- ME. I wasn't impolite, but I don't think I pulled my punches either. The only question I specifically remember was, "why did you guys use a rubber mask instead of makeup? It just looks like a rubber mask." His answer was probably very truthful -- the mask was cheaper and easier. After a few other questions, where I think I gently made it clear that this was a terrible movie, Claude just said, "I'm surprised anybody saw it." When the session was over, Claude said goodbye to the class and left the room. After a moment of silence, the prof looked at me and said, "bad movie, huh?" I assured him it was. "Didn't know that," he said. One interesting point about ASYLUM OF SATAN is that Louisville's first two real "horror hosts" were in the cast. Ol' Claude Fulkerson hosted Friday night horror movies in the late '60s as Peter Gory, then in the early-mid '70s, Charles Kissinger was The Fearmonger on Fright Night. It's interesting trivia for locals, but doesn't help the movie. Yes, it's a bad movie.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply