Absolute WORST movie ever made?!?

[Ellie]

I know that alot of people will disagree with my idea of the worst movie ever made. Attack of the Killer Tomatoes.There! I said it. E.

[onionhead]

1969 gave us Larry Buchanan's "It's Alive", with Tommy Kirk at his most desperate.  Truly travestational.
1976 produced the godawful "Curse of Bigfoot", directed by Don Fields and produced by Dave Flocker, both of whom were never seen again in theatres, and rightly so.

[raj]

I wouldn't say any Ed Wood movie is necessarily the worst.  Plan 9 is enjoyable if in the right frame of mind.  Yeah, Orgy of the Dead is boring because it is repetitive, but the Showgirls is bad too, IMO, because I couldn't give a rat's ass about any of the characters (still haven't seen it through) and it was so thoroughly cynical as to have no redeeming features.  At least Orgy was mildly entertaining.

[Vermin Boy]

Ed's stuff is way too fun to be "the worst ever." From a production standpoint, maybe, but as John Waters once said, "The only bad movies are boring ones," and Ed's stuff is anything but that.

[Dave:Blackeye15]

The top worst movies i've seen are "Children of the Living Dead" "Hellcats" "I Eat your Skin" "Red Zone Cuba" and "Manos the Hands of Fate"

-the first rule of fat club-

[onionhead]

Actually, any SciFi Original is probably in contention as worst film ever.

[Bubba]

Oh, I'm sick of all this "Ed Wood movies are not boring, and therefore not so bad" crap. The fact of the matter is that the reason they're not boring is they ARE so bad! They are without a doubt among the worst movies ever made because of the bajillions of flaws in dialogue, special effects, acting, direction, writing, etc. Just because they're funny does not redeem them of being bad.

[kirk]

Bubba wrote: They are without a doubt among the worst movies ever made because of the bajillions of flaws in dialogue, special effects, acting, direction, writing, etc.


I think you are referring to Doris Wishman.   Watch Deadly Weapons and Double Agent 73 back to back and see if you still think Ed Wood made the worst movies ever.

Kirk

[Evan3]

Actually, I believe that the worst films I have ever seen all tended to have a big budget (perhaps because, I dont get around to spending money on low budget films, with exceptions of Boa and Crocodiles,,,, I love them).

The three worst movies I have ever seen are defin itely: Darkness Falls (a TOOTHFAIRY?! NO. 1 AT THE BOX OFFICE), Batman and Robin


And without a doubt, American Psycho.

[raj]

Are Ed Wood movies poorly made (bad lighting, rotten script, poor actors?) Well, yes.  In that sense they are bad movies.

But. consider War of the Roses.  It has competent actors  Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner, and Danny DeVito (who also directed.)  Presumably the producers highered expensive scriptwriters, and had an experienced crew.  The sets were plausible, lighting good, no boom mike shots, etc.

Yet I'd much rather sit through any Ed Wood movie, even Orgy of the Dead (topless chicks never hurt) than that freakin' trainwreck off an unfunny black comedy movie.  Why? Because Wood's movies are entertaining, at least to me.  His movies are at least sincere, not an excuse by Hollywood big names to angle for a fat paycheck.  A good movie, even a bad one, to me should at least say "I want to tell you a story, or convey an idea."

[Bubba]

It's true that you're going to laugh a lot more at "Plan 9 From Outer Space" than "War of the Roses," but frankly, "Plan 9" is the worse movie. In fact, the only reason you'd rather watch an Ed Wood movie is BECAUSE it's a worse movie! So utterly, incredibly worse, that it's funny.

[The Burgomaster]

Ed Wood's movies are entertaining . . . but not for the reasons HE intended. He wanted us to be scared. Instead, he made us laugh. But the point is, he DID accomplish his goal of entertaining us.

My previously mentioned vote for worst movie, CURSE OF THE HEADLESS HORSEMAN, does not scare anyone, NOR does it make anyone laugh. It does not offer us ANY type of entertainment value. In fact, the only emotions you might have after watching it (if you can stay awake until the end) are:

1. Frustration (and you may start crying)
2. Anger (and you may punch a hole right through the wall)

But you will not, in ANY WAY, be entertained.

[peter johnson]

Well, this is sort of why we're here, right?
Andrew certainly thinks one of mine is right up there in this category (see his review of ROBOCHIC on this website), but there really are so many many contenders that it's difficult to say.
This "Headless Horseman" thing sounds like a real winner(?), though I've never seen it -- nor have I seen most of the titles mentioned here.
I really have to agree with the fellow who hated "War of the Roses", as I never got anything out of that picture & couldn't see what the fuss was about critically -- I guess lots of movie reviewers must fantasize about killing their wives/husbands.
Ed Wood is now and shall remain the Golden Standard by which one must measure le cinema wretched -- Night of the Ghouls/Jailbait/etc. etc. -- there is nothing quite like a Wood.
Still, the quest on this topic seems to be a really really BAD film, with no entertainment value -- and, no, this ain't our Eddie.
I got into trouble once on this site by championing "Equinox" as worthless, but sure enough, many contributors here find that film entertaining.  Go figure . . .
"Howard the Duck" or "The Valachi Papers"(w/Charles Bronson) are in my top 5 for lack of worth.   Though, I gotta say I watched "Amazon Women on the Moon" again recently, and was amazed at the amount of footage shot in this thing that perform no service to humour, or anything else.  Really worthless.
My vote's gotta go to a thing called "Wolf Man", though.  Shot in the 60's, it features lots and lots of talk . . .and talk . . . and talk . . . By the time one finally gets to see the bad werewolf makeup on the guy at the end, there is no brain left in the viewer to comprehend . . . it is full of talk . . . and talk . . . and talk . . .
peter johnson

[freelancePatsy]

I've actually seen "Wolf Man". You forgot to mention Earl Owensby's annoying southern accent. Every time he says "wolf" it sounds like he's saying "wuff". And he talks a lot in this annoying accent (an accent that strangely none of his other family members or anybody alse in the town has).

[G-man]

     Now, fellows, I didn't ask this question to start a fight.... I asked it because I saw this ridiculous movie entitled....Gumbo....or Gummo....not quite sure which..... I've been trying to forget this movie....THAT'S HOW BAD IT IS!!! Although, I'm sorry to say, parts of this movie keep pushing themselves to the front of my brain.... Probably trying to escape...... It had ABSOLUTELY no redeeming qualities at all.
I'm sorry, but I've got to get this out before my head explodes all over the screen...

Picture, if you will, a little boy in a bathtub. Nothing bad about that right?!? Wrong...
The bath water looks like chocolate milk...it's that dark from dirt (still ((OUCH)) wondering if the water came out of the faucet that way or if the boy was THAT dirty???) Still not convinced?!? OK!!! His mother brings him his dinner, while he's still in the tub, and then begins to shampoo his hair as he eats his dinner....
Still not convinced?!? His mother served him a spaghetti dinner on a plate, which rested on a portable dining trays, and a nice big glass of MILK to wash it down with... Doesn't that sound delicious?!? Huh?!? And that was just one scene out of the movie.... I made myself sit through this movie with a friend of mine... We both vowed that we'd NEVER watch it again..... It had NO redeeming qualities to it AT ALL...... All in all.... The worst movie EVER made....and should never have been...
I've shot better home movies..... And that's what this looked like. A HIGH BUDGET home movie...... At least , and I mean by the grace of God, the musical director contributed something to the movie..... He picked a few good songs for background.....That's it!!! I would keep telling you all about this travesty, but it hurts way too much to think about....

Now back to it... Ed Wood movies most definitely have entertainment value... With a few minor exceptions.... I only used him as an example.... You know that Wood movies are generally rated as garbage....It doesn't mean that I don't like them...
And for the record, John Landis said himself that movies used to be made with incredibly cheesy monsters and special effects BUT had really detailed plots....
Then along came Rick Baker and the likes of artists such as him, that tranformed the art of transformation to a whole new level.... I don't mind a cheesy movie, if it's entertaining.....So I agree with that analogy. You want me to DEFINE a BAD movie... One with which you pray that someone shut of the TV or VCR.....or burns every last existing copy of it so that future generations never have to suffer that kind of pain when they watch it..... That's a bad movie!!! I can't stress to you how much pain Gumbo brought me.....That's why I asked the question...It was actually a trick to warn people about that movie...... Ed Wood did make some BAD  movies... Orgy of the Dead.....come on....That one kind of hurt.... the Jet Benny Show.....I had to be STONED off my a$$ each and every time I watched that movie so I could move 5 inches to grab the VCR remote....That's bad....But, those movie didn't hurt HALF as bad as Gumbo...... Don't hate me for what I'm about to say, but.... WATCH THE MOVIE AND THEN TELL ME....... I was trying to avoid this, but it's a last resort. It hurts me thinking about that damn movie....
And on a lighter note, I happened to like War of the Roses. Perhaps because my parents divorced when I was young, but I can kind of relate to that movie....

"Enough about them...Let's talk about you....What did you think of my last concert?!?" -Mok the magic man from Rock & Rule