Part 1 (100 - 81)
Part 2 (80 - 61)
Part 3 (60 - 41)
Part 4 (40 - 21)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20: Osombie (2012)
Osama Bin Laden is a zombie. Funny, right?
The film plays its absurd premise rather straight, resulting in a pretty boring affair. It's nothing more than a handful of Army characters running around the desert, shooting at zombies. There's no real plot, story, or characterization worth noting here. It strives to be a gritty, serious zombie flick with action, but it's as dry and boring as desert sand. It's coarse, and irritating, and it gets everywhere.
It's pretty clear to me that the filmmakers just bummed around Utah, shot some scenes, and slapped it all together. Having lived in Utah for a while, I can't unsee this scenery. I'm pretty certain parts of this film were indeed shot around Eagle Mountain, where my house was--sorry guys, but I can't buy this as the Middle East at all. It all just falls apart from there.
Pretty typical WWII adventure, this time patched together cheaply from recycled action footage. It's all bland, droll, stale, and ugly-looking--pretty much the opposite of everything I want and enjoy out of a good adventure picture. A repetitive score and lackluster characters don't help much. I really don't remember much of this film at all, but when I did see it I dismissed it as weak trash.
It's hard to really like or understand this film much when so much of it looks so dark and shoddy (and I'm not really sure if that's the way it was filmed or if I was watching a shoddy DVD). Even then, there's not much to see--it's a bland and cliched action flick that sends a bunch of burly soldiers into the jungle to rescue somebody. There is action, but not much narrative momentum. Boring story and characters makes this very unmemorable. Tony Jaa is barely in the film--the actual leads don't have nearly as much presence. Turn the disc's English dubbing on though, and it becomes a pretty funny farce (especially one guy trying so hard to sound like Arnold Schwarzenegger).
The film plays its absurd premise rather straight, resulting in a pretty boring affair. It's nothing more than a handful of Army characters running around the desert, shooting at zombies. There's no real plot, story, or characterization worth noting here. It strives to be a gritty, serious zombie flick with action, but it's as dry and boring as desert sand. It's coarse, and irritating, and it gets everywhere.
It's pretty clear to me that the filmmakers just bummed around Utah, shot some scenes, and slapped it all together. Having lived in Utah for a while, I can't unsee this scenery. I'm pretty certain parts of this film were indeed shot around Eagle Mountain, where my house was--sorry guys, but I can't buy this as the Middle East at all. It all just falls apart from there.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19: Apocalypse Mercenaries (Mercenari Dell'Apocalisse) (1987)
 |
| Kill these films with fire! |
Pretty typical WWII adventure, this time patched together cheaply from recycled action footage. It's all bland, droll, stale, and ugly-looking--pretty much the opposite of everything I want and enjoy out of a good adventure picture. A repetitive score and lackluster characters don't help much. I really don't remember much of this film at all, but when I did see it I dismissed it as weak trash.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18: Mission Hunter 2: Battle Warrior (Nuk Soo Dane Song Kram) (1996)
It's hard to really like or understand this film much when so much of it looks so dark and shoddy (and I'm not really sure if that's the way it was filmed or if I was watching a shoddy DVD). Even then, there's not much to see--it's a bland and cliched action flick that sends a bunch of burly soldiers into the jungle to rescue somebody. There is action, but not much narrative momentum. Boring story and characters makes this very unmemorable. Tony Jaa is barely in the film--the actual leads don't have nearly as much presence. Turn the disc's English dubbing on though, and it becomes a pretty funny farce (especially one guy trying so hard to sound like Arnold Schwarzenegger).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17: Revenge Of The Spacemen (2014)
I'm pretty sure Troma put this out as another slice of "so bad it's
good" schlock. Their films are at their best when they focus on the
absurd--Revenge of the Spacemen is not really as crazy as it looks or sounds, and it's all the weaker for its lack of ambition.
If you've seen the pilot episode for South Park season one, then you've probably already seen the same tasteless jokes about alien abductions and anal probing, and you might have laughed a little harder at it. Revenge of the Spacemen relies on those same tiresome cliches, but it's not all that funny anymore. Showing it all with a handful of dudes wearing cheap rubber masks--a production that's purposefully cheap and campy--doesn't really elicit as much laughter as it aims for (and I'm a guy who laughed at Trail of the Screaming Forehead). The film just fails to engage at every turn--most of it is focused on a handful of stock characters who try to tickle your funny bone with their bad acting and stereotypical dialogue, but they all come off as bland, boring people. Their story is a stale and uninteresting one, leaving the titular spacemen to appear only in a couple of scenes. It's simultaneously an unfunny comedy and a cheap monster flick. It fails as both.
Home video quality did not help this one at all--the frame rates looked very choppy and weird, and the dialogue is barely audible. I can't even tell if this was the way the film was made, or if it's just a poorly-made disc. Either way, I found it dang near unwatchable.
How the mighty have fallen. I'm not even much of a gaillo fan, but even I can see how Dario Argento made his mark in films like the original Suspiria. His take on Dracula though? Yeesh. So cheap, bland, and boring. It seems like the whole movie takes place in one or two empty rooms. Performances range from bland to cringey. Gore effects look fake. You know the film's bad when the only memorable or forgivable thing are the few scenes involving topless ladies--that's literally all I remember out of this junk. There are way better Dracula adaptations out there, just as there are better 3D movies, better Argento movies, and better movies period.
If you've seen the pilot episode for South Park season one, then you've probably already seen the same tasteless jokes about alien abductions and anal probing, and you might have laughed a little harder at it. Revenge of the Spacemen relies on those same tiresome cliches, but it's not all that funny anymore. Showing it all with a handful of dudes wearing cheap rubber masks--a production that's purposefully cheap and campy--doesn't really elicit as much laughter as it aims for (and I'm a guy who laughed at Trail of the Screaming Forehead). The film just fails to engage at every turn--most of it is focused on a handful of stock characters who try to tickle your funny bone with their bad acting and stereotypical dialogue, but they all come off as bland, boring people. Their story is a stale and uninteresting one, leaving the titular spacemen to appear only in a couple of scenes. It's simultaneously an unfunny comedy and a cheap monster flick. It fails as both.
Home video quality did not help this one at all--the frame rates looked very choppy and weird, and the dialogue is barely audible. I can't even tell if this was the way the film was made, or if it's just a poorly-made disc. Either way, I found it dang near unwatchable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16: Dracula 3D (2012)
How the mighty have fallen. I'm not even much of a gaillo fan, but even I can see how Dario Argento made his mark in films like the original Suspiria. His take on Dracula though? Yeesh. So cheap, bland, and boring. It seems like the whole movie takes place in one or two empty rooms. Performances range from bland to cringey. Gore effects look fake. You know the film's bad when the only memorable or forgivable thing are the few scenes involving topless ladies--that's literally all I remember out of this junk. There are way better Dracula adaptations out there, just as there are better 3D movies, better Argento movies, and better movies period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15: Recon 2020: The Caprini Massacre (2004)
There comes a point where it feels like there are too many military sci-fi films trying to copy the formula of Aliens, and they all start to look and feel equally boring (examples of note: both the Doom movies, Starship Troopers 2, and this schlock).
Recon 2020 seems to be a film that was shot around some ghetto construction yard, then added a yellow filter over everything (and it looks quite ugly). The actors are a bunch of guys and one or two ladies in cheap-looking BDUs and armor--they shoot at each other, and boom, you have a movie. Despite one or two laughable lines, the film fails to engage with its been-there-done-that story, its cast of unmemorable characters, and repetitive action.
It looks as though more Recon 2020 films were made. I've never bothered to see them--I doubt I'm missing anything. But why watch this when I could just pop Cameron's Aliens in for the trillionth time?
Recon 2020 seems to be a film that was shot around some ghetto construction yard, then added a yellow filter over everything (and it looks quite ugly). The actors are a bunch of guys and one or two ladies in cheap-looking BDUs and armor--they shoot at each other, and boom, you have a movie. Despite one or two laughable lines, the film fails to engage with its been-there-done-that story, its cast of unmemorable characters, and repetitive action.
It looks as though more Recon 2020 films were made. I've never bothered to see them--I doubt I'm missing anything. But why watch this when I could just pop Cameron's Aliens in for the trillionth time?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14: Leprechaun: Origins (2014)
 |
| Just kiss it already. It's Irish |
Leprechaun
is pretty notorious as a bad series--it's been bad for six straight
movies. Warwick Davis kept it fun and campy, even through its lowest
points (like the times they went to space, or into the hood).
The seventh Leprechaun movie ever made is a sad disappointment in a series where the bar is already set way low. Without Davis and without any of the camp that made the other movies "so bad they're good," Origins is just boring. It plays the myth so straight and conventional that it breaks no new ground at all. Photography is bland, performances are grating, and the story moves slowly. The actual Leprechaun is an ugly mofo. In the grand scheme of horror cinema, it feels like just another monster movie--worse yet, it's unoriginal, uninspired, and droll. Charmless to the last.
This B-movie offers an interesting premise: Thomas Edison invented a contraption that could communicate with the dead. Supernatural killings ensue. Sadly, the film’s execution is just stale, bland, and cheap. Nothing about the film held my attention. The storytelling is weak. The film looks bad and it should feel bad. Now that it's been some years since I stumbled across this bargain-bin DVD, I barely even remember the film much.
In better hands, this premise (in which pills turn people into the living dead) could be scary. Or funny. Or both. This film is neither--it's a droll, forgettable B-movie with weak plotting. The film looks horrible and cheap, which is a shame considering the make-up effects and the use of colored lights. How is it that a movie with this much techno music and rave scenes could turn out so bland and boring?
Fred Vogel crafted this film with one singular goal: to create a film that creditably resembles a found footage tape that could belong to a serial killer. I have to admit that Vogel achieved what he set out to do just fine--this is exactly the kind of ugliness and depravity you can expect from a serial killer's private home video. That doesn't mean I have to like or value it though.
The film is barely watchable--partly because of the gaudy VHS quality (a purposeful effect to lend the film a greater sense of reality), and partly because of the content. There's literally no plot to this--just like with an unedited tape, you see random segments of the character doing random things, inter-spaced with some of the ugliest scenes of killing and rape imaginable. There are no heroes to this film, and it demands no respect or empathy for the killer--the only thing you can do is watch endless victimization and feel sick about it. And...is that the point? What is the point? Why would I watch this?
I wanted to believe at one point that there could be value in exploring the depths of human evil through art, as a way to reflect on it, recognize it, learn from it. That's easy to do on a film like Schindler's List. This though? Vogel's goal is to remind us that anybody, even your next door neighbor, could be a scumbag and a murderer. Unfortunately, when the film is so boring and ugly that it becomes unwatchable, I question the film's value. I have a feeling most people only watch this to challenge themselves on the violence and depravity--in which case, this becomes just exploitative tripe.
Not to be confused with the other 2005 film Chaos starring Jason Statham (what are the odds?!), this exploitative horror film is pretty much a rehash of 1972's Last House on the Left (itself, a rather sleazy and ugly picture). This was advertised as the most brutal movie ever made (although I'm pretty sure Fred Vogel with his three August Underground flicks is all like "hold my beer"). In my ignorant youth, I must have challenged myself to rent this and see how much punishment my eyes could take.
The film is cheaply-made, poorly acted, and largely bland. As promised, it doesn't hold back on the brutality and violence--the plot is nothing more than a bunch of horrible guys killing girls, and that's it. The opening title card directly tells the audience that the film's point is to underline the real-life horror of real-life killers who could stalk and murder your daughters at any given time. And yet, it's a thin mask that fails to justify shock value with no purpose. Beyond mere unpleasantness, it's tasteless and valueless.
There came a point when watching Ilsa: She Wolf of the SS where I stopped and asked myself what the heck I was watching and why. It was the first time I had done so for an exploitation movie, and I had to admit for the first time that I had absolutely no good answer for myself.
Ilsa has her fans (somehow), and apparently she has a number of films in her name, in which she tortures people and...we're supposed to like it? The thing is, I had mistakenly gone into She Wolf of the SS falsely believing this would be a werewolf movie--nope, it's a straightforward Nazisploitation movie where a camp full of people are tortured, they eventually push back, and that's the whole story. What makes it unwatchable in my eyes is the gaudy, boring photography, which makes scenes that are supposed to be engaging clinical and cold. A terribly uncomfortable amount of time is spent on their torment, which is clearly meant to be the film's main draw. And that's the problem--why should I be entertained by humiliation (tastelessly set in a concentration camp nonetheless)?
I can forgive a number of exploitation flicks simply because I don't take many of them seriously. I would have probably laughed this one off if Ilsa was a literal wolf--as grounded, tasteless, and ugly as the film actually is, I found it largely droll and despicable.
With this title and the film's poster, I wasn't going into this expecting high art. But even by horror standards, this film doesn't offer much. The actual acid bath is garish and bloody, sure, but everything else is just too hard to watch for many other reasons.
Biggest problem is that this film is hyper. The editing is just way too fast and choppy. Cinematography is amateurish. As cheap and bland as the film is, it never looks like anything beyond something some dudes shot around the hood and slapped together with annoying music. Acting is atrocious. There's literally no redeeming value to this schlock--there are Asylum films that look better than this.
If the film's intent is to make you feel like you're taking an actual acid bath, well then good job. It burns.
The seventh Leprechaun movie ever made is a sad disappointment in a series where the bar is already set way low. Without Davis and without any of the camp that made the other movies "so bad they're good," Origins is just boring. It plays the myth so straight and conventional that it breaks no new ground at all. Photography is bland, performances are grating, and the story moves slowly. The actual Leprechaun is an ugly mofo. In the grand scheme of horror cinema, it feels like just another monster movie--worse yet, it's unoriginal, uninspired, and droll. Charmless to the last.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13: The Brink (2006)
This B-movie offers an interesting premise: Thomas Edison invented a contraption that could communicate with the dead. Supernatural killings ensue. Sadly, the film’s execution is just stale, bland, and cheap. Nothing about the film held my attention. The storytelling is weak. The film looks bad and it should feel bad. Now that it's been some years since I stumbled across this bargain-bin DVD, I barely even remember the film much.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12: Raving Maniacs (2005)
In better hands, this premise (in which pills turn people into the living dead) could be scary. Or funny. Or both. This film is neither--it's a droll, forgettable B-movie with weak plotting. The film looks horrible and cheap, which is a shame considering the make-up effects and the use of colored lights. How is it that a movie with this much techno music and rave scenes could turn out so bland and boring?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11: To Kill A Killer (Para Matar a un Asesino) (2007)
Many
years ago, a movie like this would have had me fooled into thinking
that a story pitting one killer against another would be exciting and
cool. This film makes such a poignant premise droll though, thanks to
its ugly shooting style, cheap production, and poor acting. The pacing
is an absolute slog, and it makes every gaudy scene pass by the eyes in
the most agonizing way. It's barely memorable and it offers nothing new
to see.
At the time this came out, I actually had a killer-vs-killer story idea in mind, and I intended to make my own screenplay out of it. I half expected this film to mirror what I had in mind--nope, not even close. Especially now that the concept has evolved into more of a strange fiction novel, but that's still a work-in-progress. Maybe I have this film to thank for making me challenge the idea and jazz it up some. Thanks film, now I know how to not tell the story!
At the time this came out, I actually had a killer-vs-killer story idea in mind, and I intended to make my own screenplay out of it. I half expected this film to mirror what I had in mind--nope, not even close. Especially now that the concept has evolved into more of a strange fiction novel, but that's still a work-in-progress. Maybe I have this film to thank for making me challenge the idea and jazz it up some. Thanks film, now I know how to not tell the story!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10: Cult (2007)
Some
of the worst movies are the ones least memorable. And I really can't
remember any bloody thing about this film, even though I know I had it
on DVD (bought it together with The Brink, quickly dumped them in equal measure--what a horrible double-feature).
What I do recall of Cult is that it's a dark, droll, cheap, boring movie that feels like a caricature of other occult-themed horror movies. The script offers a droll story populated by weak characters, and their respective performers offer bad performances that fail to resonate. The film's as stale as they come, and it's made less watchable with its cheap-looking quality. This film is a time-waster in the most literal sense--watch anything but this.
What I do recall of Cult is that it's a dark, droll, cheap, boring movie that feels like a caricature of other occult-themed horror movies. The script offers a droll story populated by weak characters, and their respective performers offer bad performances that fail to resonate. The film's as stale as they come, and it's made less watchable with its cheap-looking quality. This film is a time-waster in the most literal sense--watch anything but this.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9: Machine Head (2000)
Hey, stick a lawnmower on somebody's head, and you have a movie!
Yeah right.
Everything that can go wrong with a film goes wrong with this one--the script, the performances, the look and style, the direction, all of it falls way flat, making it a boring, cheap, forgettable flick. Even with all its stupidity and cheapness, it still fails to become "so bad it's good," coming off as simply bad. Without any blood or guts, it doesn't even aim for shock or schlock. I don't remember much about the film now, but my life is probably all the better for it.
Yeah right.
Everything that can go wrong with a film goes wrong with this one--the script, the performances, the look and style, the direction, all of it falls way flat, making it a boring, cheap, forgettable flick. Even with all its stupidity and cheapness, it still fails to become "so bad it's good," coming off as simply bad. Without any blood or guts, it doesn't even aim for shock or schlock. I don't remember much about the film now, but my life is probably all the better for it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8: Alien Abduction (2014)
Found footage movies grate on me personally (heck, I previously had Blair Witch Project in my bottom 100). Of all the ones I've seen, Alien Abduction
annoyed me the most. Not even the final shot, showing the camera
falling from space to Earth, really wowed me--99% of the film is cheap,
ugly, and filmed with an agitating quality. The actual alien scenes
aren't anything new (it can't top what Fire From the Sky already
showed, now that was some scary stuff). Story and characters don't
amount to much. I barely even remember the film now, other than I came
out hating it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7: August Underground (2001)
Fred Vogel crafted this film with one singular goal: to create a film that creditably resembles a found footage tape that could belong to a serial killer. I have to admit that Vogel achieved what he set out to do just fine--this is exactly the kind of ugliness and depravity you can expect from a serial killer's private home video. That doesn't mean I have to like or value it though.
The film is barely watchable--partly because of the gaudy VHS quality (a purposeful effect to lend the film a greater sense of reality), and partly because of the content. There's literally no plot to this--just like with an unedited tape, you see random segments of the character doing random things, inter-spaced with some of the ugliest scenes of killing and rape imaginable. There are no heroes to this film, and it demands no respect or empathy for the killer--the only thing you can do is watch endless victimization and feel sick about it. And...is that the point? What is the point? Why would I watch this?
I wanted to believe at one point that there could be value in exploring the depths of human evil through art, as a way to reflect on it, recognize it, learn from it. That's easy to do on a film like Schindler's List. This though? Vogel's goal is to remind us that anybody, even your next door neighbor, could be a scumbag and a murderer. Unfortunately, when the film is so boring and ugly that it becomes unwatchable, I question the film's value. I have a feeling most people only watch this to challenge themselves on the violence and depravity--in which case, this becomes just exploitative tripe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6: Chaos (2005)
Not to be confused with the other 2005 film Chaos starring Jason Statham (what are the odds?!), this exploitative horror film is pretty much a rehash of 1972's Last House on the Left (itself, a rather sleazy and ugly picture). This was advertised as the most brutal movie ever made (although I'm pretty sure Fred Vogel with his three August Underground flicks is all like "hold my beer"). In my ignorant youth, I must have challenged myself to rent this and see how much punishment my eyes could take.
The film is cheaply-made, poorly acted, and largely bland. As promised, it doesn't hold back on the brutality and violence--the plot is nothing more than a bunch of horrible guys killing girls, and that's it. The opening title card directly tells the audience that the film's point is to underline the real-life horror of real-life killers who could stalk and murder your daughters at any given time. And yet, it's a thin mask that fails to justify shock value with no purpose. Beyond mere unpleasantness, it's tasteless and valueless.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5: August Underground's Penance (2007)
Third
in the series, this film continues the trend of its predecessors,
showcasing rape and murder in a found footage format, made to simulate
the kind of depraved video a serial killer might have in his own private
belongings. The distinction of this film is that it's no longer horrid
VHS quality, it's moved on to low-quality digital camcorders.
It's still a very ugly affair. The change in medium is still garish with its macroblocking and interlacing--but the content continues to be grating, showcasing nothing more than random killings intercut between random scenes. There is maybe a slight semblance of an arc emerging as one of the characters eventually decides she doesn't want to keep doing this evil stuff anymore. It's too little too late though, and does nothing to justify the heaping amount of violence and shock endured across three whole films. I can understand the first one existing to showcase the chilling prospect that anybody--your friend, your neighbor, your family--could be a killer behind your back. Three of these movies though? Nah, it's just too much now. The shock value wins out in the end, and all sense of value or taste is lost.
It's still a very ugly affair. The change in medium is still garish with its macroblocking and interlacing--but the content continues to be grating, showcasing nothing more than random killings intercut between random scenes. There is maybe a slight semblance of an arc emerging as one of the characters eventually decides she doesn't want to keep doing this evil stuff anymore. It's too little too late though, and does nothing to justify the heaping amount of violence and shock endured across three whole films. I can understand the first one existing to showcase the chilling prospect that anybody--your friend, your neighbor, your family--could be a killer behind your back. Three of these movies though? Nah, it's just too much now. The shock value wins out in the end, and all sense of value or taste is lost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4: Ilsa: She Wolf Of The SS (1975)
There came a point when watching Ilsa: She Wolf of the SS where I stopped and asked myself what the heck I was watching and why. It was the first time I had done so for an exploitation movie, and I had to admit for the first time that I had absolutely no good answer for myself.
Ilsa has her fans (somehow), and apparently she has a number of films in her name, in which she tortures people and...we're supposed to like it? The thing is, I had mistakenly gone into She Wolf of the SS falsely believing this would be a werewolf movie--nope, it's a straightforward Nazisploitation movie where a camp full of people are tortured, they eventually push back, and that's the whole story. What makes it unwatchable in my eyes is the gaudy, boring photography, which makes scenes that are supposed to be engaging clinical and cold. A terribly uncomfortable amount of time is spent on their torment, which is clearly meant to be the film's main draw. And that's the problem--why should I be entertained by humiliation (tastelessly set in a concentration camp nonetheless)?
I can forgive a number of exploitation flicks simply because I don't take many of them seriously. I would have probably laughed this one off if Ilsa was a literal wolf--as grounded, tasteless, and ugly as the film actually is, I found it largely droll and despicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3: Acid Bath (2006)
With this title and the film's poster, I wasn't going into this expecting high art. But even by horror standards, this film doesn't offer much. The actual acid bath is garish and bloody, sure, but everything else is just too hard to watch for many other reasons.
Biggest problem is that this film is hyper. The editing is just way too fast and choppy. Cinematography is amateurish. As cheap and bland as the film is, it never looks like anything beyond something some dudes shot around the hood and slapped together with annoying music. Acting is atrocious. There's literally no redeeming value to this schlock--there are Asylum films that look better than this.
If the film's intent is to make you feel like you're taking an actual acid bath, well then good job. It burns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2: Birdemic: Shock And Terror (2010)
So Bad, It's Good!
This film. This bloody film right here. This might be the one so bad that it makes all those Asylum and SyFy pictures look respectable, makes those god-awful Dungeons & Dragons videos look genuinely epic, makes the Leprechaun series seminal Halloween gold, makes Tommy Wiseau look like a modern Hollywood genius, and it might make you run off and rent The Birds 2: Land's End just to take your mind off of it.
I kid you not--literally every scene in Birdemic brims with pure fail. It's shot with barely palatable video and sound quality (sound recording is especially wacky with clipped dialogue, airiness, terrible sound effects--my ears shudder at the memories). It takes forever to get past the opening credits (seriously, four whole minutes of driving, and the theme song loops like a billion times). It takes an eternity to get to the actual Birdemic--the first act is filled with the blandest, most contrived, and most mundane love story ever conceived. When birds finally attack, they go straight for the eyes with their gaudy, low-quality pixels obviously superimposed on unconvincing fight scenes. The rest of the movie is no less abysmal as environmental messages are beat into the audience with agonizingly horrible monologues.
This only scratches the surface. Birdemic is by far the most amateur film I've seen, giving The Room a run for its money.
However...
The film is so bad, it's genuinely funny. I mean, who would think to fight off killer birds with coat hangers? And how about that scene that unconvincingly ends with mountain lion noises driving the characters away? Even the boring dating scenes in the beginning are laughable thanks to the terrible performances, poor writing, and poor shooting. The only reason this doesn't come out at the very very bottom is because the it's ultimately harmless. Still, Birdemic ought to stand as the most incompetent film ever made.
This film. This bloody film right here. This might be the one so bad that it makes all those Asylum and SyFy pictures look respectable, makes those god-awful Dungeons & Dragons videos look genuinely epic, makes the Leprechaun series seminal Halloween gold, makes Tommy Wiseau look like a modern Hollywood genius, and it might make you run off and rent The Birds 2: Land's End just to take your mind off of it.
I kid you not--literally every scene in Birdemic brims with pure fail. It's shot with barely palatable video and sound quality (sound recording is especially wacky with clipped dialogue, airiness, terrible sound effects--my ears shudder at the memories). It takes forever to get past the opening credits (seriously, four whole minutes of driving, and the theme song loops like a billion times). It takes an eternity to get to the actual Birdemic--the first act is filled with the blandest, most contrived, and most mundane love story ever conceived. When birds finally attack, they go straight for the eyes with their gaudy, low-quality pixels obviously superimposed on unconvincing fight scenes. The rest of the movie is no less abysmal as environmental messages are beat into the audience with agonizingly horrible monologues.
This only scratches the surface. Birdemic is by far the most amateur film I've seen, giving The Room a run for its money.
However...
The film is so bad, it's genuinely funny. I mean, who would think to fight off killer birds with coat hangers? And how about that scene that unconvincingly ends with mountain lion noises driving the characters away? Even the boring dating scenes in the beginning are laughable thanks to the terrible performances, poor writing, and poor shooting. The only reason this doesn't come out at the very very bottom is because the it's ultimately harmless. Still, Birdemic ought to stand as the most incompetent film ever made.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1: August Underground's Mordum (2003)
The first August Underground, alone is a gaudy and harsh watch
that'll make you feel sick. It has enough notoriety among underground
horror fans, so a second film exists. How much worse can a second video
tape from serial killers be?
It's worse. So much worse. Somehow, Fred Vogel found a way to crank everything up to the highest degree, crafting a film that's almost completely full of the most sickening violence imaginable. The blood, gore, and rape are so prominent that some things are shown that nobody has any real business seeing. All of this is brought to life by the worst characters imaginable--they spend so much of the film screaming at each other, spouting hateful words, and spreading their evil everywhere they go. A few random shots of them doing nonsense doesn't help, even if it adds to the realism.
As before, all of this is rendered on degraded VHS quality. It's nearly unwatchable this way, but it also has the uncanny effect of appearing too real. And that's the filmmakers' goal. While it's chilling to think that such people could exist anywhere--in your neighborhood even--this experience is not worth the message. There's only so much the eyes, ears, and mind can take, and this film pushes it way too far. It's by far the ugliest film I've seen, in terms of both content and style. It's plotless, I despise the characters, the narrative momentum is lacking, and there's just way too much blood, humiliation, and filth. I wouldn't wish this film on my enemies, and I hope my friends can be spared this monstrosity.
There are literally thousands of films that are worth your time. Watch an Academy Award winner. Watch a blockbuster, even if it's a flop. Watch a Disney movie for freak's sake. Anything but this.
It's worse. So much worse. Somehow, Fred Vogel found a way to crank everything up to the highest degree, crafting a film that's almost completely full of the most sickening violence imaginable. The blood, gore, and rape are so prominent that some things are shown that nobody has any real business seeing. All of this is brought to life by the worst characters imaginable--they spend so much of the film screaming at each other, spouting hateful words, and spreading their evil everywhere they go. A few random shots of them doing nonsense doesn't help, even if it adds to the realism.
As before, all of this is rendered on degraded VHS quality. It's nearly unwatchable this way, but it also has the uncanny effect of appearing too real. And that's the filmmakers' goal. While it's chilling to think that such people could exist anywhere--in your neighborhood even--this experience is not worth the message. There's only so much the eyes, ears, and mind can take, and this film pushes it way too far. It's by far the ugliest film I've seen, in terms of both content and style. It's plotless, I despise the characters, the narrative momentum is lacking, and there's just way too much blood, humiliation, and filth. I wouldn't wish this film on my enemies, and I hope my friends can be spared this monstrosity.
There are literally thousands of films that are worth your time. Watch an Academy Award winner. Watch a blockbuster, even if it's a flop. Watch a Disney movie for freak's sake. Anything but this.
