The Worst Film Ever??


I just saw this, and, well, it was the worst film I've seen in a looong time.

Everything about it was awful, to the bad acting from Lee Marvin, to the terrible camera-work, out-of-place music, stupid sound-effects, and worse plot.

Seriously, this was SO terrible. Maybe it's just because it's dated, but I've seen films 30 years before this that aren't dated, so it has no excuse. Lee Marvin is that guy we all know and hate - the one that loves himself so much he probably kisses the mirror in the morning. And to believe he's a sex symbol! Wow.

I've seen a fair few bad films in my time, but none that I have really hated all the way through. The whole theater (it was at a place which shows older films) was laughing at all the unintentionally funny moments, and never at the actual jokes. What a load of *beep*!

reply

[deleted]

SIR, YOU ARE A RETARD.

When Demons are at the Door, you have to let em' in... Let em' in and kill em!

reply

[deleted]

Why is it that every time one of these idiots comes on here to declare a certain film is the worst film they've seen they always put a question mark?. Like "Worst film ever??" Are they really asking if everyone else thinks it's the worst? If not, then why all the question marks!!!??? Morons!

Garçon! Coffee!

reply

[deleted]

Ftr, posts like the OP here are inherently ridiculous. He doesn't even claim it is the worst ever in his opening sentence. Duh.

reply

WOW..that is absurd. Lee Marvin si perfect in this movie, he barely talkls and when he does its deliberate, his actions do all the talking. Why do think the terminator movies were a success? Because Arnold Swarzneggar could be his android like self and get away with it. I'm not saying Lee Marvin is androidish but his tough guy persona shines like the sun in this movie.

Some one mentioned the French wave of crime movies...thnak you, you are 100% on the money ($93,000 dollars to be exact) i though of Goddard when i saw this and i think Boorman did too.

Worst movie...it's not even an allright movie

Fantastic movie is the word your looking for

reply

This is wonderfully made movie. What people don't understand is, when Boorman and other great directors, such as Hitchcock, made movies pre CGI, it was total craftsmanship. They used what they had, which was nothing as compared as to what a director has to his disposal today! It was pure moviemaking and storytelling. There aren't too many directors nowadays that can pull that off. The films made during that era, was raw. Directors back then, in my opinion were a bit more creative than today's directors who rely on special effects to get their point across. Just my opinion

reply

I can definitely see the craftsmanship but this is my third time starting it and it's just not engaging me. I think most of the shots are nice and you can see Boorman is always trying things and dreaming up interesting shots, but the result is extremely self-conscious "art" from the 70s. Now I'm just watching with the sound down to admire the visuals.

I'd have to shovel away a few feet of art to get to the plot, the meaning, etc.

reply

What you call "self-conscious art" that appears to get in your way - the visual strategies, sound effect choices, set decoration etc - are crucial to communicate the film´s meaning. The surrealist touches are there because Walker´s quest does not take place in our world but is rather a compulsive death dream that follows a bit different logic.

And nothing, I mean nothing can ever make this "art from the 70s".

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

WOW! Have you got a lot to learn.

reply

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/07/the_greatest_movies_ever_made.html

reply

[deleted]

When I come across threads like this the first thing I do is click in the OP name and check out their posting history so I can get some idea of where they're coming from. If you do that with the OP of this thread you will find this is his/hers one and only post on IMDB. I smell a troll.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]