Member Center

Ptooey! The worst films of 2006 | Sir Critic on Cinema
 

Home > Blogs > Sir Critic on Cinema > Archives > 2006 > December > 28 > Entry

Ptooey! The worst films of 2006

By Eric Robinette | Thursday, December 28, 2006, 07:53 AM

Being a beat reporter and a critic has its advantages. Since my reporting has to take priority, that means I don’t have to subject myself to each and every piece of obvious garbage. No “Black Christmas” for me, thank you very much!

That said, cinematic trash still litters my movie landscape. Here are the five most pungent pieces, in mostly alphabetical order:

The Da Vinci Code: When religious fundamentalists protested this movie, I thought they were being ridiculous. Still do, actually. But after seeing the film, I wanted to hold up a protest sign too: IT’S NOT BLASPHEMOUS, IT’S BORING!

Failure to Launch: The parts with Zooey Deschanel are enjoyable, but her presence cuts both ways. On the one hand, she provides welcome relief from the boring romantic coupling of Matthew McConaughey and Sarah Jessica Parker. On the other hand, Deschanel also unwittingly shows how lousy the movie is without her. And the sight of Terry Bradshaw sans boxers or briefs gave me nightmares for weeks.

Freedomland: It’s the worst kind of message picture – one that makes its points with all the subtlety of performing a root canal with a jackhammer. Joe Roth was one of the smarter studio chiefs back in the day, but he can’t direct to save his life. He managed to coax Julianne Moore into giving an overwrought performance, and that’s a feat.

Nacho Libre: Jack Black is one of the funniest actors we’ve got, but not even he could bring this one-joke movie to life. If you must rent it, here’s my suggestion: Watch it up through the first wrestling match, then shut it off. You’ve seen the whole movie already.

Finally, last and most certainly least:

Lady in the Water: You know, I hope some good comes from this movie. I really do. I hope M. Night Shyamalan, a truly gifted director, has learned never again to be so convinced of his own genius that he thinks he can get away with calling characters scrunts and narfs without making people think of a zany cartoon mouse or unsavory, um … well, I won’t get into that here. If I had heard this bedtime story when I was a kid, the nightmares would be worse than the flashbacks to Terry Bradshaw.

I also strongly disliked: “Underworld: Evolution,” “Ice Age: The Meltdown,” “All the King’s Men.”

So what movies stunk up the joint for you this year? Did any of you actually like any of my choices for some reason? ;)

Permalink | Comments (12) | Categories: Lists

Comments

By SRCputt

January 9, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this

As Eric and I recently learned, BloodRayne is a major omission. Amateurish is the word that comes to mind.

By Allie D.

December 29, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this

Two words: Silent Hill shudder

By SRCputt

December 29, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this

Where Failure to Launch comes up short for me is when it is compared to another McConnaughey film, “How to Lose a Guy…” While that film had a believable chemistry between Kate Hudson and McConnaughey, “Failure to Launch” features no chemistry between him and Sarah Jessica Parker. Never bought it. Also, too many biting animal gags.

By wcb

December 29, 2006 2:05 AM | Link to this

well…I can agree with Nacho Libre..I didn’t even see it because it looked so bad. But…cough..cough…Matthew McConaughey in Failure to Launch was amazing! Ok, I’ll give you the fact that a lot of the acting wasn’t the greatest, and the plot was somewhat lame. But the movies wasn’t that bad.

By Sir Critic

December 29, 2006 12:40 AM | Link to this

Actually, Gail, I had to forget “Wicker Man” because it wasn’t screened for critics (like so many movies this year). And I read nothing to convince me I should see it. However, I did hear from plenty of people like yourself who have convinced me I should not, so thank you!

By Gail

December 28, 2006 10:20 PM | Link to this

You forgot “Wicker Man.” When I saw it, people in the theater were laughing at how horrible the movie was. It has to be one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen. Watching Nicholas Cage is really just painful.

By SRCputt

December 28, 2006 6:45 PM | Link to this

Hope, if you mean the Oliver Stone film “World Trade Center”, then I am just baffled. If you are referring to the CBS documentary “9/11”, once again I am baffled. Did you expect a run-through of the 5000+ stories from that day in two hours? As to the Stone movie, if you gave up after 15 minutes you never got to the real emotion between the two men and their wives, or paid attention enough to realize the characters weren’t firefighters (Jimeno and McLaughlin were policemen). If you mean the CBS documentary, you gave up way too soon. I will never forget the bravery shown by the firefighters in that documentary and the sound in that film of bodies hitting the pavement will forever haunt me. But I would hope you wouldn’t mean the CBS documentary, because it is 5 years old.

By Lauren

December 28, 2006 6:00 PM | Link to this

While I agree with most of what you said, I disagree with you on “Lady in the Water”. While it didn’t have the edge or brilliance of his other movies, it still was a suspensful movie with great acting and graphics.

By Hope

December 28, 2006 2:37 PM | Link to this

The worst movie I’ve seen in 2006 is The World Trade Center 9/11; I could only watch the first fifteen minutes of it and got bored. I remember that day very clearly like everyone else, and trust me, there was more to it than just firefighters getting stuck.

By Mandy

December 28, 2006 1:42 PM | Link to this

I must say I had hopes for “Lady In The Water.” It had a really cool press kit and I liked the trailer. I think I might still check it out. (I never did have hope for “The Da Vinci Code,” and there was definitely too much hype surrounding it.)

By ME

December 28, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this

I haven’t seen any of these movies. Either I just don’t watch enough movies or I spend most of my time watching the good stuff - OLD MOVIES! But I will probably (despite your honest attempts to warn me) I will watch at least one of these. DaVinci, cause Mom says it was good. Maybe Lady just to see how bad it is. Thanks!

By SRCputt

December 28, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this

I might have been able to get past the narfs and scrunts if Lady in the Water didn’t take itself so seriously. Its whispered secretive tone was so at odds with the ridiculousness of its story. Few films in my lifetime have failed so completely at what they were trying to do.
 

Things to do