What’s your favorite good bad movie? Everyone has one, be it an adaptation that was botched between page and screen, or a film with horrible execution that ruined the premise. The fundamental truth of these movies that failed to deliver (but are still loved by some) is that they could've been much, much better.
Hollywood is littered with failed films that should have worked. It seems like every year gives us a handful of awful movies with great ideas, but whose flashes of brilliance are lost in a sea of mediocrity. Few things are more depressing than movies that could've been great but turned out crap, because you can see the greatness within them, trapped, forever unable to get free. In some ways it's worse than a movie that's terrible in every way, because at least those aren't wasting potential.
- Photo: 20th Century Fox
TL;DR: It Turned Two Or Three Potentially Good Movies Into One Overstuffed Bad One
There may not be enough time left on Earth to fully explain how great a sin Brett Ratner committed with X-Men: The Last Stand. Following two wonderful installments from Bryan Singer (who was off disappointing fans with Superman Returns instead of concluding a possible trilogy), The Last Stand simultaneously mutilates two of the comic world's most acclaimed storylines.
The studio cycled through a number of directors before Ratner finally signed on. Those who turned the role down or left the project include Darren Aronofsky, Joss Whedon, Zack Snyder, and Matthew Vaughn. Yet Ratner can't take full credit for The Last Stand - co-writers Simon Kinberg and Zak Penn deserve equal billing in the credits of this catastrophe. Together, they concocted the idea of blending the Phoenix saga with a story about a cure for mutants.
What could have been two or three movies' worth of content was rushed out the door with middling effort and a Michael Bay-like reliance on spectacle-over-character. This mentality directly contradicts the thoughtful social commentary, philosophical insight, and contained action setpieces.Should've been better?
- Photo: Warner Bros.
TL;DR: Shaquille O'Neal Dons A Clunky Metal Suit To Play A Doomsday-Sized Iron Man
In the comics, John Henry Irons puts on a metal suit and goes on a solo quest to rid his streets of super weapons he designed. It's an enthralling undertaking, in which he tries to make up for a sin committed several years earlier. If you're noticing any parallels to Iron Man, the good folks at DC would like you to please ignore that. The character’s initial solo series, which arrived after he tried to be Superman (a matter for another day), was the origin of a new hero who traded on wits and served the little guy.
Then, some dillhole decided to make a movie starring Shaquille O'Neal in the lead. Never mind that casting a professional athlete as a brilliant scientist is an even sillier concept than casting him as a genie - Steel is a mess from start to finish.
O'Neal is awful, his supporting cast (including villain Judd Nelson) is static, and the story is so predictable that not even one of the greatest NBA players of all time, clad in laughable metal armor, can get a rise out of the audience. It's a seriously terrible movie that's not even bad enough to be funny.Should've been better?
- Photo: New Line Cinema
TL;DR: Everything Went Wrong From Starter Pistol To Finish Line
The 1996 adaptation of H.G. Wells's eponymous novel was a behind-the-scenes disaster from day one. Val Kilmer was an impossible egomaniac, Marlon Brando was as eccentric as you might expect (he suggested a final act twist in which it's revealed his character is a dolphin). Kilmer strong-armed producers into casting him in a different role than they initially offered him so he had to work fewer days, then got mad other characters had more lines than him. Brando refused to learn his lines; instead, an assistant read them to him via earpiece.
To add to that background insanity, the manimal costumes used by the extras - some of whom were homeless rainforest dwellers, by the way - were really sad, and underground sci-fi director Richard Stanley, who conceptualized the film and wrote the script, was fired and replaced by John Frankenheimer. The result was a sad, limp interpretation of one of Wells’s most thought-provoking novels.Should've been better?
- Photo: Warner Bros.
TL;DR: No One Needs Wolf-Hybrid Channing Tatum, No Matter How Good The World Building
The Wachowskis have an undeniably cool sense of scope, and their action scenes are always imaginative. They are great populists and humanists, part of a grand Hollywood tradition that stretches back to Charlie Chaplin. Unfortunately, they also make ultra-weird, unrewarding choices like casting Channing Tatum as some kind of wolf hybrid and Mila Kunis in a role not ideally suited to her skill set.
Mix those spectacularly bad choices with world-building that aches for a series, not a stand-alone piece, and a plot that putters by as a result, and not even the stellar action sequences can save this mess, especially when some of the talkier scenes are shot in such awkward, stilted close up that it feels like bad television.Should've been better?