At number 42, it now joins elite company like "Gigli", "From Justin to Kelly", "Glitter", and the classic "Santa Claus Conquers the Martians".
That's unfortunate. Cats really isn't that bad. It is much better than its rating.
shareWait. Stop everything. There is a movie called "Santa Claus Conquers the Martians" and I didn't know about it???
shareIt's one of those movies that is so bad it's good. It's worth a look.
shareUnlike Cats it is actually fun, one of those "So bad it's good" films.
Cats is more like "so bad, it's bad".
Haha I had the same reaction!!
share
That does not surprise me.
😎
A long time ago, when the IMDB had better quality control, this would've meant something. Now, it doesn't. All that means is that tons of bored college students with multiple accounts and a lot of time on their hands coordinated to spam the IMDB so that it would make the bottom 100. They do that all the time.
shareI'm sure it's not 2.7 type of bad, but it does look pretty bad.
shareFrom what I'm hearing, it's probably a 5/10, so bad but not in the way of being incompetent or lazy. For a movie to be in the 2.0 range, IMO, it has to be incompetent and lazy all around (poor editing and sound, bad acting, bad sets, etc.).
share