The Big Picture: Worst Movies of 2012

[AnneSQF]

I have avoided all these movies gracefully through this year. Sadly I also avoided a fair bunch of the good ones. Whoops...

About Les Miserable: ""Is Javert the only police officer in Paris?". HA! That's what I'm thinking every time I hear it. And Cosette and Marius is horrible characters indeed.
I haven't seen it because it won't shown here (in Denmark) until March, but I'm still hyped for it. A lot of my (luckier, foreign) friends have praised it so I'm optimistic.
But I do dread how they decided to balance the acting/singing. Musicals shouldn't be pitch perfect if the characters have personalities, and (not all, but some of) this musical's characters are really good.

 

[xPixelatedx]

I actually think SpiderMan was pretty good.
The only thing I really hated in it was how they made Lizard.
Electro is a really unkown villain for me thou...

I entierly agree. It wasn't fantastic, and it did lack some of the emotional appeal of the first movie franchise (well, the first 2) but it was one of the only movies I enjoyed of 2012. You know Bob HATED this movie before he even saw it, so I am not surprised it ended up here. XD Surprise, surprise the movie he liked the most before he saw it also made it to #1 on his list of best movies.

 

[twesterm]

Boo on hating Les Miserables.

Ignoring Russell Crowe, it was pretty great. Even Amanda Seigfried (who's name I cannot spell -_-) who wasn't good, wasn't really bad and at least Cossette isn't that interesting so she really didn't bring it down. I didn't even mind that High Jackman couldn't really hit all the notes in Bring Him Home (since most guys can't), he was still pretty amazing. Ignoring those two, everyone else delivered pretty amazing performances and it's really hard to hear your criticisms on the show after it's been a broadway classic for how long?

I will say though, I want to hurt that person, that executive that things they need some male lead who has no reason being in a musical in every broadway musical turned to movie. Gerard Butler, Pierce Brosnan, Richard Gere, and now Russell Crowe. This would have been a near-perfect movie if it hadn't been for Russell Crowe's terrible performance. Even ignoring the fact he can't sing he still did an all-around bad job.

Just feels like one of those hey let's rile people up! picks. I guess it worked?

-edit-

And I knew you were going to put this movie on this list because of your too damn long comment earlier this month.

-edit #2-

Also doesn't Bob generally not like musicals anyways?

 

[Jabbawocky]

Oh, hi all, I didn't see you there.

I was just here, adding to the chorus reminding Bob that Amazing Spider-Man is actually pretty good and that he unapologetically praised trailers of the upcoming Superman reboot for the same reasons he panned ASM both before and after it released (namely making a reboot of a 5 year old franchise turning a bright, colourful superhero into a derivative, Batman Begins-infused "gritty" movie), despite ASM being strongly adapted from Ultimate Spider-Man books that predate Batman Begins by half a decade.

Have a nice year, everyone.


You know, I don't much care that Bob disliked the film, I disagree with him on many other counts, too. I mostly dislike that he doesn't seem to acknowledge how much he is in the minority there or how many of us quietly and respectfully have been disagreeing with him. I mean, hearing him you'd think ASM was universally panned in the way Battleship was, which it wasn't, or that the viewers and critics that liked it are lowest-common-denominator idiots that can't articulate why they liked it, which we aren't.

I happen to think ASM is well acted, that Garfield works really well as an updated Peter without harming Maguire's portrayal of the Silver Age-like version. I also felt that framing his angst as less the result of bullying and more of a missing father figure thing is a closer match for the character's core themes that also helps avoid the jarring disconnect of the Spidey and Peter storylines in all of the Raimi movies. And man, Emma Stone's Gwen is such a great character for a superhero movie, never descending into being the damsel in distress (she actually saves *herself* and a bunch of other people the one time she's in danger) and remaining clever and resourceful without having to be depicted as a tough gal action hero.

On the other hand, the only defence of The Expendables 2 I've heard from anybody has been "it's all the cool action heroes together, what's not to like?", so... maybe I haven't been listening hard enough?

That what grates me about Bob's opinion too, its that he treats it like fact rather than an opinion. If he wants to dislike it then thats fine but every time he goes into a rant all I ever get the impression is that he is butthurt that he never got Raimi's fourth movie or that Spidey will spend another 5 years outside of the Marvel Stuidos movies.

 

[Legion]

I haven't seen any of those movies. Probably for the best.

Either have I. Although to be honest, this list hasn't changed my opinions in any real shape or form as I never had much interest in seeing them in the first place.

What a (non)surprise, ASM is on this list. Show of hands, how many here expected Bob to throw it on here as yet another jab to this movie?

Oh, who would have guess, That Spiderman would be on the list. It ain't like you have ***** about it for a whole fucking year.

Are you suggesting that he shouldn't put a film he believes to be terrible in his top ten worst movies list, simply because he has repeatedly mentioned it before?

 

[daibakuha]

That what grates me about Bob's opinion too, its that he treats it like fact rather than an opinion. If he wants to dislike it then thats fine but every time he goes into a rant all I ever get the impression is that he is butthurt that he never got Raimi's fourth movie or that Spidey will spend another 5 years outside of the Marvel Stuidos movies.

Honestly, a lot of us comic nerds have a soft spot for Spidey. To see his films only go in a worse direction than would have gone if Marvel was allowed to make them is more than a little frustrating.

What's even worse is that ASM has an amazing cast, that's completely misused by it's shitty director and terrible script.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

If he really didn't like the movie, he's allowed to ***** about it as much as he wants. I really liked The Dark Knight Rises, and I was disappointed that he didn't like it, but I'm not going to get my tits in a twist because he's vocal about it.

The Amazing Spider Man could've been the second coming of a chocolate dipped cocaine-dusted Jesus and MovieBob's review of the movie would have told us that the chocolate would make us fat, the cocaine would make us impotent and paranoid, and that where was Jesus whenever a priest molested a child. And the same can be said of his stance on Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy, and presumably the same stance will be taken if Man Of Steel doesn't measure up to what MovieBob wants to see in a Superman movie regardless of whether it is decent or even good film in it's own right.

I'm tired of him jamming his opinion down my throat that now that 'The Avengers' has arrived, every single movie now has drop everything, stop whatever the fuck they were doing and reverentially treat it as some sort of mythic Urtext handed down from up above from some higher divine power.

 

[daibakuha]

What a (non)surprise, ASM is on this list. Show of hands, how many here expected Bob to throw it on here as yet another jab to this movie?



Exactly, it's like Bob can't mention superhero movies or bad movies in general without whining about ASM anymore, he complains about it every opportunity he can find when it's even slightly justifiable, far more than he has ever complained about FAR worse movies. It's almost like Bob knows ASM is good but he's in massive denial of that fact and is trying incredibly hard to convince everyone else and himself that's it's bad despite knowing full well it's not.

The worst part is how his criticisms of ASM are not just wrong in the opinionated sense, but factually as well. He complains about how far from the comics the movie, characters, plot, tone etc. are, when in fact the opposite is true, ASM is probably the movie closest to the comics (it's sort of a mix between Amazing Spider-Man and Ultimate Spider-Man in terms of that) to be made yet. The characters act similar to their comics counterparts, the humor that Spidey is known for is pretty frequent, while that was almost nonexistant in the Raimi movies, the villain actually acts like the Lizard instead of being some guy who isn't even remotely like the comic version like the Raimi villains were, and the female lead actually DOES something instead of being whiny for no reason and just being there for the villain to kidnap like they usually are in Superhero movies. As for the cast, most all of them look and act like the characters they are playing effectively.

That, and not to mention that without ASM we wouldn't have gotten one of the best Spider-Man video games ever made, that alone justifies the movie's existance.

Couple of points, Bob is not the only critic to hate this movie.

Second, it uses some of the comic storylines, changes them around a bit and then doesn't stick the landing.

Third, just because it uses some elements from comics, doesn't make it a good film.

Fourth, the ASM video game is garbage, it's a worse version of Arkham City and it doesn't even get webslinging right. Something perfected in the best Spiderman game ever: Spiderman 2.

 

[TheSchaef]

And Russell Crowe CAN sing Broadway style which is why he did do a good job as the Javert with that deep voice of his.

No. He pretty much can't. And I think you and I differ on what constitutes a deep voice. Michael Dorn has a deep voice. Russell Crowe has a gruff voice, which works fine when you're playing a battle-hardened tough guy, but not so well when you're trying to fill up a theater with a bold, round tone.

You know, like this guy [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urxk4mveLCw].

I'm tougher on him in this role than most, because I'm kind of a "Javert snob" since he's my favorite character in the musical, but you put him next to Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway and it only makes it stand out how outclassed he was in the vocal department.

Anyway, this clearly is a movie for fans of the musical, and putting it on the list is a bit harsh. I thought some of the decisions they made for the film were interesting, like using Lamarque's funeral procession as the set piece for When Tomorrow Comes. But even that is probably just a comparison to other renditions of the musical, and while I appreciate the effort to emphasize the historical context of the uprisings, I'm also looking at a crowd that attended and/or purchased the DVD of an event where the actors just stand at microphones in costume and sing the songs to thunderous applause.

 

[Baresark]

And Russell Crowe CAN sing Broadway style which is why he did do a good job as the Javert with that deep voice of his.

No. He pretty much can't. And I think you and I differ on what constitutes a deep voice. Michael Dorn has a deep voice. Russell Crowe has a gruff voice, which works fine when you're playing a battle-hardened tough guy, but not so well when you're trying to fill up a theater with a bold, round tone.

You know, like this guy [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urxk4mveLCw].

I'm tougher on him in this role than most, because I'm kind of a "Javert snob" since he's my favorite character in the musical, but you put him next to Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway and it only makes it stand out how outclassed he was in the vocal department.

Anyway, this clearly is a movie for fans of the musical, and putting it on the list is a bit harsh. I thought some of the decisions they made for the film were interesting, like using Lamarque's funeral procession as the set piece for When Tomorrow Comes. But even that is probably just a comparison to other renditions of the musical, and while I appreciate the effort to emphasize the historical context of the uprisings, I'm also looking at a crowd that attended and/or purchased the DVD of an event where the actors just stand at microphones in costume and sing the songs to thunderous applause.

Haha, I think you're playing dirty when putting him next to Philip Quast. But, I can see you're point. You are right, it is more gruff than deep. I liked Crowe's performance so much I think because the way it is framed it's very personal. The upside to the movie production is that the actors played the production as actors and not necessarily great singers, though there were some great singers in there.

I'm also willing to bet that it's an actor who chose Lamarque's funeral procession. The actors sing the parts how they feel the scene should go and it was scored afterwards to the music fit the singing. An interesting way of doing things, no doubt about that.

 

[twesterm]

And Russell Crowe CAN sing Broadway style which is why he did do a good job as the Javert with that deep voice of his.

No. He pretty much can't. And I think you and I differ on what constitutes a deep voice. Michael Dorn has a deep voice. Russell Crowe has a gruff voice, which works fine when you're playing a battle-hardened tough guy, but not so well when you're trying to fill up a theater with a bold, round tone.

You know, like this guy [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urxk4mveLCw].

I'm tougher on him in this role than most, because I'm kind of a "Javert snob" since he's my favorite character in the musical, but you put him next to Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway and it only makes it stand out how outclassed he was in the vocal department.

Anyway, this clearly is a movie for fans of the musical, and putting it on the list is a bit harsh. I thought some of the decisions they made for the film were interesting, like using Lamarque's funeral procession as the set piece for When Tomorrow Comes. But even that is probably just a comparison to other renditions of the musical, and while I appreciate the effort to emphasize the historical context of the uprisings, I'm also looking at a crowd that attended and/or purchased the DVD of an event where the actors just stand at microphones in costume and sing the songs to thunderous applause.

I'm only replying to this comment because I don't want to dig through the thread to find Baresark's, but people actually think Russell Crowe did well?

He was so easily the worst part of the movie and wasn't suited in any way at all for the role. He can't sing and he totally missed the mark on making Javert what he was supposed to be. I said it before, but it just *really* annoys me that any time there's a broadway show turned movie, some moron has the bright idea to cast some random guy who cannot sing in one of the major parts.

Do they really thing the ladies are going to go to Les Miserables because Russell Crowe in it?

It's just so upsetting because everyone else did so amazingly well (well, minus Amanda Seyfried, but that's just a personal dislike of her voice). The director did have that weird love for zooming in and doing nothing else on peoples faces as they sang, but I'm fine with that. I'm even find with not having Eponine sing in the epilogue even though that's one of my favorite parts or Hugh Jackman not hitting all the notes in Bring Him Home, it's just, ugh, Russell Crowe was just completely wrong for that part.

 

[TheSchaef]

I liked Crowe's performance so much I think because the way it is framed it's very personal.

I could probably see that if they played it like the recent Phantom adaptation, where they cast a bunch of classically-trained singers, and then deliberately cast the Phantom without that training to create an unrefined, edgy feel to him. But everybody was talking about, dude, check it out, Russell Crowe can, like, sing and stuff. And all I could think was that he seemed to spend the entire film in his "head voice", and never got under anything to give it real depth. I am dissapoint.

I'm also willing to bet that it's an actor who chose Lamarque's funeral procession.

And I'm willing to bet that hiring dozens of actors to line the streets and constructing the giant black carriage to serve as the hearse, means that this scene was planned well in advance of any opportunity the actors had to embellish their lines.

 

[BakedZnake]

Personally thought Dark Knight Rises was just as bad as ASM.

 

[Carnagath]

Though thankfully most of your reviews tend to signify otherwise, that closing comment of yours makes it a little hard to believe you go into movies with an open mind.

Nobody can go into a Shyamalan movie with an open mind anymore. It's not possible.

My least favorite movie of the year would have to be Brave. Thanks Pixar, for making me pay money to watch a feminist fairytale, with... uhm... some kind of weird obsession with bears that made no contextual sense. Go away.

 

[Winthrop]

wait wait wait
the bad guy for ASM 2 is going to be electro? just electro?
WHAT IN THE HELL?! are they trying to make these movies suck? why the heck do they insist of using those b list villians? its not like spidy doesnt have good villians he does!
doc ock, green goblin,the sinister freaking six! how hard would it be to use them instead of freaking electro and the lizard?! (and yes i am fully aware that electro is a reacuring member of the sinister 6) this is just frustrating...

While I understand your point, I do not necessarily agree. I think in a way using these B list villains is a good thing. For those of us who are into the comics it gives our favorite lesser known villains a chance to shine (Lizard is my personal favorite spiderman villain, although I feel like they dropped the ball on him in every way possible with this movie. They got the look, internal conflict, and personality completely wrong). I personally don't like Electro and would rather they use another villain, but if some people like him thats fine I guess. For people who aren't into the comics, using obscure villains gives them something unexpected. Everyone knows Doc Oc and I think most people know Venom as well. While using them may draw people in because they are so iconic, not using them gives something completely new to people who aren't too into the comic.

That said using the Sinister Six would be interesting, but possibly hard to manage (might run into the problem spiderman 3 had with villain balancing).

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

I'm glad Bob disliked Les Miserables, because I also couldn't stand how they did nothing to fix the horrible story. No one gets any real character development, and nothing seems to have much stage time before the kleptomaniacs come back to make everyone laugh. It's all right for a musical, but I don't think it works as a film.

 

[JudgeGame]

The only one I have a problem with on this list is Battleship. I genuinely enjoyed that movie and though it was deeply flawed with its poorly revised script and its pathlogically unlikeable protagonist, the resulting story was inspirational and badass. Whoever makes the Michael Bay comparison has forgotten just how offensively terrible the Transformers films were. ASM deserves first place and Expendables deserves at least third (though to be honest maybe it doesn't even deserve to be considered a movie). If anyone even remembers ASM in 10 years, it will probably be counted as one of the worst films in the history of mankind. I'm saying this as someone who doesn't even like Spiderman in general, ASM is really an awful piece of shit.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

Truly "good" superhero scripts are actually quite rare, as you suggest. The best ones are usually the ones that try and keep it pretty simple (e.g. Superman II, Avengers, Blade, etc.) and is part of why I think they keep going back to origin stories . The problem here is that, to me, ASM's script is every bit as bad as those others you listed. In terms of script alone, I actually wouldn't put FF on that list, as that movie's problems stemmed from a lot of other sources, but ASM shares the same horrible characterization and poor internal logic as those other two.

Again,I didn't think the movie was horrible. It was an easy film to turn your brain off and watch the pretty special effects and Emma Stones (better as a redhead, though) and just let it go. But in terms of story and dialog, it was really bad.

Bad internal logic I can agree on (then again I sort of expect it from Superhero movies, that still doesn't make it acceptable as we're discussing), horrible characterization I can't.

I mean this is the first Spider-Man I have ever seen where I actively disliked the character.

This has been a common complaint that I've never understood. It goes into what you say later:

I want it to do justice to the character(s) and the feel.

Because this is where I think the movie shined best. It did justice to Peter Parker as Spider-Man, Peter Parker IS an asshole in the comics and almost every animated adaptation he has been in. But he's a loveable asshole, he beats criminals and cracks jokes at them. He deals with tragedy the way any smart teenager does, through humor and not violence.

And the end scene, with the "Those are the best kind" (promises you can't keep) just made him come across as the biggest fucking douche to have ever existed.

I don't think much of this line other than him trying to comfort Gwen who is in mourning. We don't really know if this means he's going to break his promise to Captain Stacy or if he's going try to find a way to adhere to his promise while still being Spider-Man.

On top of that, most of the scenarios presented in the film were so amazingly contrived if not purely ridiculous (e.g. what was the web in the sewer really supposed to accomplish? The writers couldn't even figure it out apparently because they had to use another device, the legion of geckos, to move the scene along).

Ok I guess I can agree with that. But other than that scene, what other scenarios can you point out? (I don't say that rhetorically BTW)

And seriously, what was up with the fish? They spent like 15 minutes setting up some sort of inside joke that seemingly went nowhere. But thankfully all the characters got so say "Branzino" a few times.

Can you refresh my memory on this?

Are you suggesting that he shouldn't put a film he believes to be terrible in his top ten worst movies list, simply because he has repeatedly mentioned it before?

They're suggesting that Bob is much too blinded by his hatred of the movie to think objectively. I personally don't give him credibility because he thought Spider-Man 3 was a decent movie.

 

[spiffleh]

Excellent. Having seen none of those movies, I guess I have spared myself some pain, even if I have disagreed with Bob a time or two.