Worst film you've seen recently?

pedrossi

New member
Last night I saw Crank... :mad:

Crank stars Jason Statham as a hitman-for-hire that wakes up poisoned by some Mexican (?) rentagangstas that have injected him with a toxin that will kill him if his adrenaline levels drop. Think the human equivalent of 'Speed', but less good. Statham heaRAB onto the streets to find an antidote and to find the crazy fools that have essentially sentenced him to death.

To be fair, it's not a bad idea, but it's awfully executed. The plot is wafer thin. Why the directors couldn't have developed it a bit is beyond me. The problem with a plot this thin is that it becomes tiresome after about 45 minutes; if the characters were better developed then it would be easier to overlook the plot, but they aren't.

Because the characters are unbelievable and the plot is non-existent, it's easy to notice inconsistencies. All of the stereotypical black gangsters that make an appearence early on have guns, which they point at Statham's character. When he headbutts one of them, nobody draws a gun.

The characters range from two-dimensional to unrealistic to annoying. Let's start with Statham's character 'Chev'. He's English, and he's called Chev. Riiiight. He's the central character yet all we find out about him is that he's a hitman with a bimbo girlfriend and is good frienRAB with a doctor (what luck!).

The doc is a cursing, 'cool' doctor. Very unrealistic. And the girlfriend is a waste of space. She fits directly into one of the many stereotypes in this film. In fact, I don't think there's a single character, either major or minor that is not a stereotype. Whether it's the stereotype of ''ard men', mexicans, blondes, asians, blacks, they're all in this film.

Can I also add that Jason Statham should not be allowed to talk in films, let alone be a leading man. He's rubbish. None of the actors are particularly good. Statham shows up as second-worst behind his on-screen squeeze.

And why is there so much bigotism? Sexism, racism, homophobia. All of that rears its head multiple times. There's no need for it, and it just shows the script as being desperate as opposed to being funny or cool.

I can't believe this peice of toss was directed by 2 people. I've never done as much as direct traffic and I could have done a better job. These men should not be allowed to as much as work in a cinema.

And don't get me started on the scene where Statham almost rapes his girlfriend in front of a crowd of people, including children.

Maybe it's because I've been watching so many Scorsese movies recently, but this one seemed more dire than even The Transporter. Waste of time.
 
I agree with nearly everything you say there - but for some reason I absolutely loved this film. It was so ridiculous it was brilliant! :D:D
 
I was a little disappointed in Crank as well. :(

Erm, others;

THEM not as scary as I was told it was
Hollow Man 2 not as good as the first one
 
There are those films that are so bad they're good, but I found Crank to just be plain bad.

If it was also satirising the genre, then that would have been fine, but it clearly wasn't.
 
They're making a crank 2, as a direct follow on from the first film...with Jason in again...which just makes the ending of the first film even worse
 
I will be passing on any film that stars Jason Statham in the future. I've seen and reviewed a few of his films in the past and they were all embarrassingly bad films. Crank is what finally did it for me though. I decided to apply a new golden rule to myself from the point that film ended. That being "I must never watch another Jason Statham film again" The guy can't act either. He brings new meaning to the word "wooden" ;)

As for the last worst film I watched... 10 minutes of "The Karate Kid Part III" Just to remind myself how incredibly painful a sequel that tripe is. I hate it when two decent films get a really lousy third part.
 
Im sorry what did you expect, its a horror film, I think the fact that it had an 18 certificate was a bit of a give away, I suggest that since the BBFC are a lot less stringent now days that anybody who does not like horror films stays away from the 18 cert ones, this "just sick and yuck!!"does not make it a bad film;)
 
No, the fact that it was a terrible and lazy cash in sequel to the surprisingly enjoyable 2006 remake is what made it a bad film. Personally i didn't think it was as gory as its predecessor either.

I liked Crank, it reminded me of "old fashioned" 80's action films where nothing seemed to make sense and thousanRAB of people were massacred by one guy with a machine gun (a la Arnie in Commando). Watch it expecting utter stupidity and you'll more than likely enjoy it for what it basically is: "Speed 3, this time it's in a cockney geezer!".

Worst film i've seen recently was 'Wild At Heart', i turned it off after 40 minutes, a completely pointless and weird film. I'm staying away from David Lynch films from now on.
 
I think you should be forced to sit through all three hours of "Inland Empire" for that comment :p :D

Its been a very long time since I've seen a bad movie at the cinema (the last one was probably one of the Pokemon movies my son dragged me to see) but I've seen a few godawful ones on TV.

The other day I watched "Dude Where's My Car" to see if it was as bad as everyone says it is. I turned off after about 10 minutes. It was an absolutely unwatchable pile of garbage.
 
Are you talking about "The Hills Have Eyes" or "The Hills Have Eyes 2" I was referring to "The Hills Have Eyes" remake, which is what toogoodfortv said, 28 weeks later is another bad sequel(I just hope 28 months later when released is not as bad) other bad films imo are the remakes of "Get Carter""The Italian Job" and the coming soon to a theatre near you remake of "The Long Good Friday" also the remake of another classic film "The Wicker Man" one remake that may work is "The Dam Busters" ;)
 
Back
Top