Worst movie ever.


enough said, bad in every aspect.

"I used to be indecisive, but now im not too sure."

reply

Not so bad really. It's charming, magical, fun, inventive, funny... One of my faves. It has certainly spawned it's share of immitators.

Have you never seen a Harry Potter movie?

What about TROLL 2? Talk about worst movie...

reply

this movie by far is not the worst movie ever, is a movie with a low budget but a great history and message. so chill out and enjoy it.

reply

[deleted]

"It's charming, magical, fun, inventive, funny... "

What kind of drugs are you on??? This movie stank to high heaven! The ONLY funny part was the movie within the movie:

"Yes, your canary is a pod person from the planet Mars."

reply

nope it has to be one of the worst ive ever seen, acting is so bad i cant even understand how most of the actors got into acting, btw Harry Potter blows this crap out of the water, i could actually sit through all of the Harry Potter movies unlike this one that lasted 30mins before it got turned off.

"I used to be indecisive, but now im not too sure."

reply

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well if you actually sat through ANY of the Harry Potter movies then you know how much they owe to this film.

you do realize that this is where Harry Potter actually came from...

And the acting is pretty darn good, Julia Louis Dryfuss, Michael Moriority, Shelly Hack, Juns Lockart, and the number one child actor in the world at that time, Noah Hathaway... Jenny Beck actually won an award for her acting in this movie.

And the film DOES have a loyal fan base, and it does introduce the world to a hero named Harry Potter!

-- though this Harry Potter does not have anything as contrived as a lightning bolt scar, he is hero of the piece and is about the same age, the same coloring, and dresses similarly... the costume (plaid Flannel shirt worn over a dark blue T-shirt, and dark slacks) Harry Potter wears in the finale of the movie TROLL, is very similar to the wardrobe as depicted in the sketches from the books, as well as the first time that we are introduced to him in the Warner franchise movies...

--And though not quite a wizard yet, he does learn about magic from a witch (remarkably similar to Prof Mc Gonigal, dresses the same, --same victorian gown, similar neck broach on her high collar, hair worn up in a bun) though not at Hogwarts admittedly, she does in fact teach him the ways of magic just the same) and she gives him a magical staff to do battle with...

--And though the young hero called Harry Potter in Troll dosen't have a portion of the dark wizard within him, --he does have to confront the evil wizard that has come back, transformed into a hideous troll (Turok), not unlike another wizard that came back transformed into an evil snake-man (Voldemort) both vowing revenge and campaigning to take over the world...

--And he does have to fight a giant troll to save a little girl (Wendy Anne) in Troll, not unlike another Harry Potter who has to fight a giant troll in the Sorcerors Stone to save a little girl (Hermine)...

--And as there is no Hogwarts there is no Ron, Griffendor etc.. My guess is that J K Rowling must've "borrowed" the boarding school concepts from the WORST WITCH TV series, that was playing in the UK on the telly about the time that she created her stories. The prototypes for many of her featured characters are in the series

It's pretty obvious that this original movie "Inspired" the most succussful film franchise of all time.

There are many material simularities aside from those listed here in the Rowlings/ Warner Potter franchise and the 1986 movie Troll

Yup, a pretty good little movie. low budget yes, but it inspired a lot of people growing up. Me included. The story AND the Harry Potter character, witches, fantasy worlds, and magic...

Good movie.

reply

i get where you are coming from, lots of films i grew up with in the 80s seem poor to me now, back then i would have liked this film before i could spot talent and good acting.

"I used to be indecisive, but now im not too sure."

reply

Times change as do acting styles.

To put the film in perspective, the acting and the writing, the storyline, and the humour, work very well for the era in which it was made. The whole movie is just plain fun. And it is, in this context, quite good and pretty much ahead of its time.

The whole Harry Potter thing is extraordinary, don't you think?

I mean the concepts in, and of themselves are brilliant, a parrallel world of magic, witches, wizards and a heroic kid named Harry Potter, about a decade befor J K Rowling Wrote a word...

And as for the acting,

Cinefantastique said: "Michael Moriority gave the genre performance of the year." in TROLL. As I mentioned, Jenny Beck won an award for her performance in the film. I'd hardly call either Julia Louise Dryfuss, Shelly Hack or June Lockart bad actresses. I thought their performances were spot on. I'd say there was a great deal of wonderful talent and good acting in this picture.

reply

I agree! So bad it's good!

reply

You mean like Jack Nicholson in Batman? I or Adam West in Batman? There IS a difference.

Personally I like the acting style in the movies of the mid-eighties. It's not really bad, it's appropriate for its time. It is stylized, like all movies made during a specific era. I like the acting in TROLL. It's beautifully over the top.

Christopher Lloyd is a brilliant actor form that era. He's great in the Back to the Future films. Maybe over the top for these days but perfect for those films. And they ARE great films.

The acting in TROLL is not bad at all. It works in the context of the film and is theirfore very good.

reply

I disagree with anyone who would say that this is the worse movie ever. I think it's great for the time it was made during the eighties. It was great acting and entertaining.

reply

(To me...) A lousy movie is a movie that doesn't entertain. This film was a lot of (guilty pleasures) fun! However I was sorry to see Sonny Bono bite it so soon in the movie... For me, he was the HIGH point!

I will next watch Troll II... Sounds like a winner... X-D


Trust me,
Swan
My, you're nosey, aren't you?

reply

In the DVD "The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made" I think its numbered at #34 as the worse film ever made, but I'd agree that it is in fact thee worst film ever made. Now this doesn't mean that it's not watchable, I think every movie has something that deserves an iota of respect. For me it was Jenny Beck, good actress.

http://www.flixster.com/user/vos410

reply

Troll 2 was worse.

Let it be unsaid: insignificance is the locus of true increpation.

reply

This one doesn't even make my top 100 Worst Movies.

If you thought this one was bad, I seriously recommend that you avoid:
Troll 2
— I couldn't watch 15 minutes of it! That is just not the way teens talk to each other! The dialog was so stiff and formal it must have been translated from a foreign language by someone not at all familiar with colloquial English.
Annihilation Earth (2009)
— Aside from the plastic plot, the plastic storyline, and the plastic villains they have Marina Sirtis trying to do a Texas accent — it doesn't come off well.
• Any and all of the "SyFy Channel [Extremely] Original Movies"
— The writers, directors, and producers of these things have put out some of the cheesiest movies I've seen since since the 1950s. The only positive thing I can think to say is, "I admire your ability to get paid for that."(Quelle fromage!)

No two persons ever watch the same movie.

reply

I've seen worse movies just today. So no, the worst movie hyperbole doesn't apply here. It's not a good movie in any way, but not the worst.

reply

troll 2 >>>>

reply

Worst movie ever.

Oh, you've never seen "Billy Jack" (1971) have you? Billy Jack is so bad it makes your hair scream and your teeth itch. Billy Jack put the B. A. D. in bad.

reply

Actually, as a kids' movie I think this works pretty well. I always liked the puppet kinds of monsters. I was surprised to find out the rating was so low. (4.8, I think when I checked)

Lots of movies get tossed into the category of "worst movie", but one that I got as part of a two movie DVD for $1.00 still seemed overpriced to me. "The Beast of Yucca Flats". With a title like that and Tor Johnson you would think it couldn't miss on the sci-fi, cheesy, fun factor, but it turns out the movie is an endurance test. I watch a lot of B-movies and I don't think I've ever made it to the end of Beast of Yucca Flats.

reply