The 4 Worst Films of 2015

The 4 Worst Films of 2015

It's end-of-the-year list time! This time, the worst movies of 2015.

Read Full Article

Entourage needs a mention merely because it provoked this reaction from critic Mark Kermode:

So, bottom 10 films I've seen this year, confining them to films seen in cinemas or released in Oz in 2015:

10) Truth
9) Phoenix
8) Walking the Camino: Six Ways to Santiago
7) A Walk in the Woods
6) The Hard Problem
5) Pan
4) Fantastic 4
3) Jupiter Ascending
2) Learning to Drive
1) The Secret in Their Eyes

I want to stress though that numbers 10 to 5 are by no way bad films - yes, even Pan I enjoyed, though I recognise its problems as both an adaptation and its own story. Simply had to choose the least good films of what's, for me, been a good year in terms of what I've seen. As for the 4 to 2...well, I actually like aspects of Fan4stic and J. Ascending, but I won't deny that they're heavily flawed. And LtD...sorry Ben, I love ya, but you couldn't save this meandering plot.

Now, the Secret in Their Eyes, I admit is very much a personal choice. Functionally, it's fine. But as someone who adores the original Argentine version, I HATED this movie. It's just pretty much an inferior version of an excellent movie that's more contrived, is less well handled in regards to its mystery, and is less...well, good. By all rights it isn't a bad film, but hey, my list, I can indulge some personal whims, especially since in terms of enjoyment I'd rank Pan much higher than many of these.

Pixels? Have we so soon forgotten such an abomination?!

Ridiculous 6 beat out pixels, eh? Wow.

Wow, Ridiculous 6 must have been that bad to not include Pixels in there instead.

No Jupiter Ascending? For reals?

Jesus fuck. To think I PAID to see it. Uuuuugh.

Marter:
The 4 Worst Films of 2015

It's end-of-the-year list time! This time, the worst movies of 2015.

Read Full Article

I've got to say that Happy Madison did one damn good movie in Grandma's Boy and even that had flaws. But overall it was, IMO, great and hilarious. What the fuck happened? Adam Sandler got fat, lazy and figured out a way to make himself money while doing relatively nothing, getting as you said a vacation for him and his friends out of it.

A note: Allen Covert is a decent comedy actor, seems like a smart guy. I know he's friends with Sandler, and lately has mostly just played bit parts in some of the Madison productions. Ever since Grandma's Boy I get the feeling he's tried to relegate himself more to the background, doing the producer angle with just cameos... I don't get it. Dude seems like he's a smart guy, maybe he feels he owes Sandler something. I'm sickened by the direction Sandler's films have taken because, yes, I used to love his stuff. Key phrase: "Used to."

GrumbleGrump:
No Jupiter Ascending? For reals?

Jesus fuck. To think I PAID to see it. Uuuuugh.

Hawki:
So, bottom 10 films I've seen this year, confining them to films seen in cinemas or released in Oz in 2015:

10) Truth
9) Phoenix
8) Walking the Camino: Six Ways to Santiago
7) A Walk in the Woods
6) The Hard Problem
5) Pan
4) Fantastic 4
3) Jupiter Ascending
2) Learning to Drive
1) The Secret in Their Eyes

I thought Jupiter Ascending was one of the better movies this year. I actually had a better "Star Wars" experience with this movie than I did with The Force Awakens. Speaking of Star Wars, why did everybody complained that Jupiter Ascending relied on tropes? Star Wars was a textbook of tropes from The Power of Myth by Joseph Campbell. I thought the ending of Jupiter Ascending was somewhat subversive. The Wachowskis admitted that this was a science fiction fairy tale. So, the choice that Jupiter Jones made at the end was anti-climatic, but did make a bigger point. Overall, I thought Jupiter Ascending was the most underrated movie of the year.

KissingSunlight:
I thought Jupiter Ascending was one of the better movies this year. I actually had a better "Star Wars" experience with this movie than I did with The Force Awakens. Speaking of Star Wars, why did everybody complained that Jupiter Ascending relied on tropes? Star Wars was a textbook of tropes from The Power of Myth by Joseph Campbell. I thought the ending of Jupiter Ascending was somewhat subversive. The Wachowskis admitted that this was a science fiction fairy tale. So, the choice that Jupiter Jones made at the end was anti-climatic, but did make a bigger point. Overall, I thought Jupiter Ascending was the most underrated movie of the year.

Weird, considering the story was a meandering mess, the lore is laughable, the action was overdone, the characters were unlikeable, the CGI was extremely noticeable, the acting is subpar, the dialog is stupid and the entire movie begins nowhere and ends nowhere.

Weird.

I remember back in my childhood I enjoyed several of Adam Sandler's movies. Billy Madison, Happy Gilmore, hell I even liked Don't Mess With The Zohan. I dunno if it was just my childhood/teen innocence or if he actually used to give a damn. It's sad either way looking at the drek he releases now.

GrumbleGrump:
Weird, considering the story was a meandering mess, the lore is laughable, the action was overdone, the characters were unlikeable, the CGI was extremely noticeable, the acting is subpar, the dialog is stupid and the entire movie begins nowhere and ends nowhere.

Weird.

This. To me, J. Ascending has a fascinating premise (probably been done before admittedly), one that's absolutely squandered in execution. To me, this is what people claim the Star Wars prequels to be, rather than what they actually are (not saying Ep. 1 and 2 are without flaws). There's a huge universe waiting to be explored in J. Ascending and instead we focus on planet ownership, plus that Jupiter itself is a disempowered protagonist throughout the whole thing.

Hawki:
This. To me, J. Ascending has a fascinating premise (probably been done before admittedly), one that's absolutely squandered in execution. To me, this is what people claim the Star Wars prequels to be, rather than what they actually are (not saying Ep. 1 and 2 are without flaws). There's a huge universe waiting to be explored in J. Ascending and instead we focus on planet ownership, plus that Jupiter itself is a disempowered protagonist throughout the whole thing.

Yeah, that makes it more infuriating to me. It's like if the movie didn't focus on Jupiter then it could have a shot at being actually decent. Focus on the morality of genetic manipulation. Focus on wars between the owners of planets. Focus on the bounty hunters. Focus even in the fucking bureaucracy, with a mind snappy enough you can make a sort of grim comedy out of it. But no, let's focus on the boring toilet scrubber that somehow hasn't yet applied for a modeling job yet.

For me, the worst film by far I saw in theatres was Jupiter Ascending.

Also the best one, in that I didn't watch many films in theatres this year.

Personally, I thought it was "meh", but at least "meh" in a somewhat unusual way, as opposed to generical meh films.

Doesn't the ranking usualy have 5 since you can easily put Pixels into it!

GrumbleGrump:
Weird, considering the story was a meandering mess, the lore is laughable, the action was overdone, the characters were unlikeable, the CGI was extremely noticeable, the acting is subpar, the dialog is stupid and the entire movie begins nowhere and ends nowhere.

Weird.

That's just like, your opinion maaaaaan. I kindda liked Jupiter Ascending too. Unless, of course, everyone must think as you do?

The list seems solid, and that's rare here on the escapist. I am surprised Pixel didn't make it on the list, but to be fair I haven't seen like on of them on here so they may have been just that bad. XD

This is kind of taking the thread in a different direction, but was Pixels actually THAT bad? I didn't see it, but in the scope of my personal experience, the most hated films I've seen this year were Fan4stic (opinion on that is mentioned above) and Paranormal Activity (didn't see it), whereas Pixels had a bit of a miff, and then fade away while at least F4 kept popping up. I'm not trying to defend the movie, as again, haven't seen it, but nothing I've seen or read about it suggests it was so horrible to be the absolute worse, only lacklustre (bar the "trophy wife" thing).

Hey, look on the bright side, I've given you a chance to vent your spleen. ;)

Hawki:
This is kind of taking the thread in a different direction, but was Pixels actually THAT bad? I didn't see it, but in the scope of my personal experience, the most hated films I've seen this year were Fan4stic (opinion on that is mentioned above) and Paranormal Activity (didn't see it), whereas Pixels had a bit of a miff, and then fade away while at least F4 kept popping up. I'm not trying to defend the movie, as again, haven't seen it, but nothing I've seen or read about it suggests it was so horrible to be the absolute worse, only lacklustre (bar the "trophy wife" thing).

Hey, look on the bright side, I've given you a chance to vent your spleen. ;)

It was personally offensive to video gamers, I gather. This is a site made up almost entirely of video gamers. Ergo, it's going to poll worse on this site than the rest of the world. No mystery there.

I've never seen it because why waste your time on a Sandler movie? I can't really blame him for his movies either. They make reliable money through a tested formula, with few troubles in his movies' development processes. In gamer terms, he's found a degenerate strategy, and it's not really his problem or fault that it works. The world only has themselves to blame for continuing to throw money at him.

GrumbleGrump:
No Jupiter Ascending? For reals?

Jesus fuck. To think I PAID to see it. Uuuuugh.

Well that's just shame on you. I wouldn't pay to see ANY young adult movie in theatres nowadays, especially the ones where they try to turn Channing Tatum into someone serious.

OT: Also band wagon here but Pixels should REALLY be on this list, man.

Spider RedNight:

Well that's just shame on you. I wouldn't pay to see ANY young adult movie in theatres nowadays, especially the ones where they try to turn Channing Tatum into someone serious.

OT: Also band wagon here but Pixels should REALLY be on this list, man.

What's a 'young adult movie'? I thought it was a term for films from YA books which Jupiter Ascending isn't it's an original film.

Hawki:
This is kind of taking the thread in a different direction, but was Pixels actually THAT bad?

It was so amateurish it really shocked me.

SyFy Original Movie bad, and not even in a good way.

Personally on Jupiter Ascending I'm rather mixed. I certainly wouldn't say it was a good movie, but I didn't think it was nearly as bad as many seemed to. In a way it reminded me of "The Chronicles of Riddick"; not a great movie in and of itself, but far from unwatchable and you could see where there was a pretty good movie in there somewhere, if only they had changed the focus a bit.

P-89 Scorpion:

Spider RedNight:

Well that's just shame on you. I wouldn't pay to see ANY young adult movie in theatres nowadays, especially the ones where they try to turn Channing Tatum into someone serious.

OT: Also band wagon here but Pixels should REALLY be on this list, man.

What's a 'young adult movie'? I thought it was a term for films from YA books which Jupiter Ascending isn't it's an original film.

It's not? Then it should try a little harder to be more original because everything about it screams "young adult" - my mistake then but it still seems made for that genre of people.

Also I tend to separate movie adaptations from books - i.e. The end of Breaking Dawn was spectacular for a second whereas the entire book sucked. So even if it was based on a book, I still would've put it under the "young adult" section of movies in my brain.

Either way, my bad

Sarge034:
That's just like, your opinion maaaaaan. I kindda liked Jupiter Ascending too. Unless, of course, everyone must think as you do?

Not really. But you seem to think that flaws in a movie are completely excusable as long as you like it. They are not. Jupiter ascending is a subpar movie by pretty much all accounts. You liking it is irrelevant.

P-89 Scorpion:
What's a 'young adult movie'? I thought it was a term for films from YA books which Jupiter Ascending isn't it's an original film.

As someone who's done writing courses and talked with a YA teacher/author, young adult is usually classified as such when it corresponds to a number of criteria:

-Age range of protagonists (teens, young adult...nah, really?)

-Themes. There are usually two main themes in YA books that classify them as such. One of them is empowerment - usually the protagonist is in a position of disempowerment at the start of the story, that's at least in part due to their age/social standing. Harry is abused at the Dursleys. Katniss could be called into the Hunger Games at any time. Pris is part of a caste system. Peter Parker is an awkward nerd, etc. Usually the story involves them transcending their position.

The second theme is usually "awakening," as in, the protagonist gains a better understanding of (some aspect of) life/their life/their circumstance. Sexual awakening is the example that's most common here - as in, the protagonist becomes aware of their sexuality, of their attraction to their opposite (or same) sex, etc. However, the idea of awakening can apply to any number of circumstances/themes; the proviso is that this awakening should correspond to a point of awareness that the average teen goes through at the age in question.

-By this criteria, J. A doesn't fit YA. Jupiter isn't in the age range in question, nor are her circumstances tied in with her age (rather, they're based on social strata/lack of wealth). She is theoretically empowered by her bloodline, but ends the story in the same position that she begins it in. Her awakening is based on greater awareness of the universe (the planet harvesting), but it doesn't correspond to psychological aspects of the YA age group in regards to those revelations, or her concerns. People may scream "romance=YA," but if that's all you have, then that's a hell of a lot of movies that become YA by that definition.

GrumbleGrump:
Not really. But you seem to think that flaws in a movie are completely excusable as long as you like it. They are not. Jupiter ascending is a subpar movie by pretty much all accounts. You liking it is irrelevant.

On a personal level, I'd argue that he's in the right - flaws in a movie are excusable on the personal level as long as one likes it. To quote a reviewer (paraphrased), "everything is flawed. The key to any truly great work is where the good outweighs the bad so much that you don't even notice the flaws." Citing a personal example, I've already cited that Pan has flaws, judging it on both its own merits, and especially as an adaptation/prequel. I can accept those flaws. That doesn't mean that I didn't enjoy the heck out of myself while watching it.

Then there's the other approach, the principle that he honestly thinks J. Ascending is a good movie, and doesn't have the flaws mentioned. And you know what? That's great. It's great that even in terms of objective (or what counts as objective) analysis, people can reach different conclusions. I'm actually glad personally that people liked J. Ascending, because, IMO, it had so much potential, and I'm glad that in the minds of some, it's realized. To cite another personal example, I think Alien 3 is one of the most criminally underrated films out there, and that it's way better than what its RT score would suggest. Unlike Pan, I laud it on both the personal and critical level. But I'm capable of accepting that many people don't agree with me there.

I don't go to the movies often, usually only to watch big spectacle films that are best seen in theaters, but a friend convinced me to watch Fant4stic with them and it turned out to be the worst superhero movie I've ever seen. I can usually find something nice to say about any game or movie, even infamously awful ones, and the fact that I can't say a single nice thing about Fant4stic is a testament to its awfulness. The fact that its not even on the list while some of the ones here were big titles that earned money just scares me off from the cinema even more.

GrumbleGrump:
No Jupiter Ascending? For reals?

Jesus fuck. To think I PAID to see it. Uuuuugh.

I was looking for it on the list too.

Good lord I hated that movie.

I'm wondering is it still OK to like Happy Gilmore? With every new terrible Adam Sandler movie I feel more and more ambivalent to it.

MarsAtlas:
I don't go to the movies often, usually only to watch big spectacle films that are best seen in theaters, but a friend convinced me to watch Fant4stic with them and it turned out to be the worst superhero movie I've ever seen. I can usually find something nice to say about any game or movie, even infamously awful ones, and the fact that I can't say a single nice thing about Fant4stic is a testament to its awfulness. The fact that its not even on the list while some of the ones here were big titles that earned money just scares me off from the cinema even more.

Y'know, as low as Fan4stic is on my list, I can still mention a bit of stuff I liked about the film. Namely:

-I like Reed's presentation to the class at the start. I can accept that it's a cliche - geeky kid who's the laughing stock of everyone who will one day go on to great things. However, I do think it raises an interesting point/concept - Reed wants to build a teleporter, and explains why it's not too farfetched. Teleportation is something that I think can have a case made for it in real life, even though I doubt that we'll ever achieve it (similar to FTL travel). And yet he's laughed down, and asked to aspire for a "real" career. The idea behind it, that children are expected to aspire to only certain career paths, is an interesting one.

Of course it's a mystery why, having finally built his teleporter, Reed is simply showing it as a science fair, and that Sue and Franklin Storm are AT a science fair at all, but hey, credit where credit is due.

-Throughout the film in the first part there's a certain optimism that I like. These are all intelligent people (Reed, Sue, Victor, Johnny, arguably Franklin) who all have a passion for their field of work, and all get to work together to build the world's first teleporter. I like how this is handled, how it's science, and not presented too cheesily, but the enthusiasm and worth of scientific endeavour is on display. It's stymied a bit by Franklin and Victor going on about how "my/your generation ruined the world, we need to go to Planet Zero for resources, boo hoo," but again, credit where credit is due.

-I like the discussion scene after the succesful test, how it's pointed out how we can name the people who went to the moon, but not so readily the people who made it possible. Speaking personally, I can name Verner von Braun and Korolev as being key in the US and Soviet space programs, but most people will sooner remember the likes of Neil Armstrong and Yuri Gagarin than those who worked on the ground. Again, it's a nice point. While the characters act like fools after going to Planet Zero, I can sympathize with the desire to go at all.

-Plus the aftermath is well handled. The atmosphere, the body horror...people may say "this isn't Fantastic 4, this isn't meant to be dark and gritty." To which I say, judging a work by itself is separate from judging it as an adaptation. I think Starship Troopers is a great movie for instance, yet is horrible as an adaptation. These are separate standards, and by itself, I think Fan4stic is fine up to this point.

-Key word "up to this point." Because it's at this moment that the movie falls apart structurally - we've spent an hour on the first act, and have to compress the rest of the film into about 30 minutes. Others have already pointed out the problems in this section of the movie. I like the idea of the F4 being weaponized, of Ben's resentment towards Reed, and I actually like Doom...sort of. He's intimidating, there's a sense of dread when he's walking through the base. Course we then go to "I want to kill everyone" and "let's go to Planet Zero, which now has a breathable atmosphere for some reason," and everything else (and where did Doom get his cape), and then end with "yay, we're all friends now, let's call ourselves the Fantastic 4 now - something that feels like it should be in the middle of the movie rather than end of it."

Fan4stic is between Pan and J. Ascending for a reason. J. Ascending has great ideas but poor execution. Pan is flawed, but I enjoy it regardless. Fan4stic is somewhere in-between...I honestly think a good movie could have come out of this, and there's sparks of that movie there. But at the end of act 1, something...snaps, I suppose. Maybe it was Trank, maybe it was Fox, maybe it was something else. But I do genuinely have some good things to say about it as mentioned above, but ultimately, this is a flawed, arguably even broken film.

Darth Sea Bass:
I'm wondering is it still OK to like Happy Gilmore? With every new terrible Adam Sandler movie I feel more and more ambivalent to it.

Dunno. Speaking personally, does anyone else like Click? I accept it riffs off It's a Wonderful Life, but I honestly loved it at the time. I've barely seen any of Sandler's work, so I can't really compare, but, well, just hoping I'm not "the one (in)sane man."

Hawki:

MarsAtlas:
snip

Y'know, as low as Fan4stic is on my list, I can still mention a bit of stuff I liked about the film. Namely:

-I like Reed's presentation to the class at the start. I can accept that it's a cliche - geeky kid who's the laughing stock of everyone who will one day go on to great things. However, I do think it raises an interesting point/concept - Reed wants to build a teleporter, and explains why it's not too farfetched. Teleportation is something that I think can have a case made for it in real life, even though I doubt that we'll ever achieve it (similar to FTL travel). And yet he's laughed down, and asked to aspire for a "real" career. The idea behind it, that children are expected to aspire to only certain career paths, is an interesting one.

Of course it's a mystery why, having finally built his teleporter, Reed is simply showing it as a science fair, and that Sue and Franklin Storm are AT a science fair at all, but hey, credit where credit is due.

-Throughout the film in the first part there's a certain optimism that I like. These are all intelligent people (Reed, Sue, Victor, Johnny, arguably Franklin) who all have a passion for their field of work, and all get to work together to build the world's first teleporter. I like how this is handled, how it's science, and not presented too cheesily, but the enthusiasm and worth of scientific endeavour is on display. It's stymied a bit by Franklin and Victor going on about how "my/your generation ruined the world, we need to go to Planet Zero for resources, boo hoo," but again, credit where credit is due.

-I like the discussion scene after the succesful test, how it's pointed out how we can name the people who went to the moon, but not so readily the people who made it possible. Speaking personally, I can name Verner von Braun and Korolev as being key in the US and Soviet space programs, but most people will sooner remember the likes of Neil Armstrong and Yuri Gagarin than those who worked on the ground. Again, it's a nice point. While the characters act like fools after going to Planet Zero, I can sympathize with the desire to go at all.

-Plus the aftermath is well handled. The atmosphere, the body horror...people may say "this isn't Fantastic 4, this isn't meant to be dark and gritty." To which I say, judging a work by itself is separate from judging it as an adaptation. I think Starship Troopers is a great movie for instance, yet is horrible as an adaptation. These are separate standards, and by itself, I think Fan4stic is fine up to this point.

-Key word "up to this point." Because it's at this moment that the movie falls apart structurally - we've spent an hour on the first act, and have to compress the rest of the film into about 30 minutes. Others have already pointed out the problems in this section of the movie. I like the idea of the F4 being weaponized, of Ben's resentment towards Reed, and I actually like Doom...sort of. He's intimidating, there's a sense of dread when he's walking through the base. Course we then go to "I want to kill everyone" and "let's go to Planet Zero, which now has a breathable atmosphere for some reason," and everything else (and where did Doom get his cape), and then end with "yay, we're all friends now, let's call ourselves the Fantastic 4 now - something that feels like it should be in the middle of the movie rather than end of it."

Fan4stic is between Pan and J. Ascending for a reason. J. Ascending has great ideas but poor execution. Pan is flawed, but I enjoy it regardless. Fan4stic is somewhere in-between...I honestly think a good movie could have come out of this, and there's sparks of that movie there. But at the end of act 1, something...snaps, I suppose. Maybe it was Trank, maybe it was Fox, maybe it was something else. But I do genuinely have some good things to say about it as mentioned above, but ultimately, this is a flawed, arguably even broken film.

I kind of agree. My favourite director is Stanley Kubrick, who build his filmography on adapting books and novels. The main criticism adressed towards him was that he never cared about making an accurate film adaptation of the source material, but only used the authors work to tell him own story in an already established setting with an established plot.

Kinda what you said about Starship Troopers. The science fiction story by Robert Heighlein was a fairly basic pulpy story about space marines (before the concept of space marines became clichee). The director of the blockbuster used the story to create a satire of military propaganda and fascist culture.

Trank really wanted to pull of the same thing, though the studio took control from him and reshot 40% of the film (if the director is to be believed). What we got is a film that is somewhere in between "The Fly" and "Mallrats".

GrumbleGrump:

Sarge034:
That's just like, your opinion maaaaaan. I kindda liked Jupiter Ascending too. Unless, of course, everyone must think as you do?

Not really. But you seem to think that flaws in a movie are completely excusable as long as you like it. They are not. Jupiter ascending is a subpar movie by pretty much all accounts. You liking it is irrelevant.

Perhaps the flaws themselves are relative, no? Do people not have different tastes and preferences? Can one not say this wheat bread is kindda stale, but I still prefer it to that fresh rye? I'm not saying it didn't have flaws, but I did enjoy some things you pointed out as being issues so yeah... You're not the authority to determine what I, we, like. State your opinion as opinion, not as fact.

Caramel Frappe:
Don't forget, Adam Sandler starred in Pixels which was one of the worst movies alongside Maul Cop 2 and Ridiculous 6 (also the worst movies ever) ... which the actor had a part in all of them. I get the feeling he doesn't care about his career anymore, or his reputation for that matter. The dude's doing these for a pay check, and his comedy falls so flat onto it's face the facial features are not even recognizable anymore.

Adam Sandler is cancerous, and I don't meant that in a toxic manner. He really is cancerous, plaguing movies and ruining what quality is left in the film industry. I want to see him retire, before he causes the genre 'comedy' to be forever tainted.

The most mystifying thing about that trailer is HOW DID HE GET SO MANY HUGE STARS TO AGREE TO THIS

good lord how does he have enough money to keep bribing these people that normally have better sensibility?

Were 8 crazy nights, Billy Madison, and Happy Gilmore really that big of hits?

What is so bad about explosive Diarrhea?

Some comedy series like the Simpsons, Warcraft, or South Park made okayish poop jokes. In mein opinion the presentation and quality of the joke is important, not what it is about.

In some ways, the most irritating thing about Adam Sandler is that one gets the sense that he's a fairly intelligent human being, he can turn in a good performance, and he has some sense of what separates a good movie from a bad one.

...Which in turn implies that he has an utter contempt for his own audience and simply can't be bothered to try any more.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here