The 5 Worst Films of 2016

[Naldan]

...

I feel that a lot of critiques (certainly not all that gave Ghostbusters a positive review!) were biased and driven by political reasons and therefore corrupted the RT-rating. But really, that's just a feeling based on a few examples I can't even remember. Nevermind though, I primarily meant the audience and the box-office result.

---

I would agree that the people hating the movie before its release were mostly at fault, but fact is that after the abysmal trailer, people were pissed. That sparked the vitriol of the creators. So you have a shitty trailer, the creators (including some actors) talking an abnormal amount of shit and then, after a while of shittalking, a mediocre movie at best.

Yeah, I think it is debatable and you're right. But from my point of view, the trailer and then Feig and his friends started and antagonized a passionate chunk of the fans. And then the movie itself wasn't that good either. As if the PR-desaster was deliberate in hope of pulling as much attention as possible and disregarding the fact that the tactic of "any press is good press" doesn't work any way near as good anymore thanks to the internet.

TL;DR: I would agree with you if they wouldn't have started it.

 

[madwarper]

The 5 Worst Films of 2016

Are you trying to ignore that Adam Sandler released another straight-to-Netflix "movie" last year, or are you saying that those 5 were worse the The Do Over?

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

If you want to say that wasted potential makes these movies the worst of the year, then yeah. But many really enjoyed Suicide Squad, at least more than any other of these three. BvSoJ had a rather redeeming Blue Ray release.

Debatable.

Going by Rotten Tomatoes, according to critics, Ghostbusters>BvS>Suicide Squad, while for audiences, BvS>Suicide Squad>Ghostbusters (BvS and SS are practically equal in both rankings). So, going by numbers, I'm willing to concede that more people like the DC films than Ghostbusters.

On the other hand, I AM skeptical about the idea of BvS getting redeemed in the extended cut. I've heard some people say it makes the film better, some say it doesn't, others that the improvement is academic to the overall assessment.

Ghostbusters on the other hand just dragged everything into the mud it came in contact with and keeps on decaying and bothering almost everyone with its odor. Dude, if you personally enjoy this movie, keep on enjoying it. In general though, it was the most mediocre or worse movie of these three. And it had no redemption of any impact whatsoever after its theatrical run.

I'd actually say that people were dragging Ghostbusters through the mud rather than it being the other way round. The tragedy of Ghostbusters is that it'll probably be remembered for what happened before its release rather than the release itself - the moment where the Internet reached a perfect storm of communal outrage. Also, as far as cultural impact goes, it's not really fair to compare it against DC films. Superhero films are all the rage right now, and that's filtered down all the way to kids growing up today (judging by the amount of superhero stuff I see in children's/junior fiction at least). In contrast, at least in my experience, Ghostbusters has never been that big of a thing. As in, most people will have at least heard of the movie, but...well, let me put it this way. Everyone in the Western world will have at least heard of Batman or Superman. If I mention "Slimer" or "Zool" or "Stay Puff Marshmellow Man" to the average joe, I'll probably get awkward silence at least half of the time.

Plus, despite Sony's hopes, I can't really call Ghostbusters 2016 a franchise movie, because it's effectively separate from every Ghostbuster continuity that's come before it, whereas the DCEU is an ongoing thing. So, while I'm not saying the film is above criticism, I do think it's disingenuous to put it on the same cultural level as all the superhero stuff that's become prolific over the last decade or so.

Who ever "enjoys" BAAAAAAD movies are just flattering them.

Um, no, not really. If someone enjoys a bad movie, it can usually either be down to:

1) "It's so good it's bad" (in which case you're having fun at the film's expense)

2) "I know it's a bad film, but I enjoy it anyway."

Gods of Egypt does fall into the latter category for me. I genuinely did enjoy it, but I can't deny that it has significant problems in areas ranging from characterization to its CGI. So, bad enough to get into my bottom 10 worst films, but not bad enough that it's in my bottom 5, which were all bad in the sense of being unpleasant to watch.

I just feel even enjoying BAAAAAAD movies and I mean Birdemic/The Room levels of bad, will only spawn more of them sometimes they won't have that "So Bad Its Good" Charm.

I mean Spoony watched all the Twilight Movies because he thinks its hilarious, but watching Twilight Breaking Dawn Part 1 broked him down to drinking for its sheer awfulness.

 

[Marter]

Are you trying to ignore that Adam Sandler released another straight-to-Netflix "movie" last year, or are you saying that those 5 were worse the The Do Over?

The latter. I saw The Do-Over. It sucked - but it wasn't as bad as The Ridiculous Six or as bad as any of these (or a few others, too).

 

[McElroy]

Well, I'm simply glad I haven't seen any of these and likely never will.

But I have seen Angry Birds. And that movie is perfectly watchable. Like it tries way too hard to be hip and cool, but luckily has the integrity to sorta be its own thing, so you can relax and just try to guess what dumb goofs might happen next.