MovieChat Forums > Gigli (2003) Discussion > Only someone who knows nothing about fil...

Only someone who knows nothing about film would consider this the worst.

posted 10 years ago by knoxfan2008
6 replies | jump to latest

This film sucked, I would give it a 3/10. But please use your head when examining films! This film was competently shot, the lighting was fine, the sound mixing was reasonable. That ALONE makes it nowhere near the worst film ever made when you compare it to the thousands of garbage b-z grade films, pretentious indie films, bland-by-the-numbers found footage horror films like 'The Devil Inside', or garbage propaganda docos about how 9/11 was an inside job.

Just because people hate "Beniffer" or whatever, that is an OUTSIDE reason to dislike a film. Yes, the acting for the most part sucked (especially Bartha's embarrassing performance), it was awkward and had some of the worst uses of music I've ever seen in a mainstream film. But do you forget the really enjoyable Pacino scene? Or the ridiculous Walken scene? Those alone have more entertainment values than many films. Some of the dialogue actually was genuinely good, and the stars were eat least trying.

So please, yes it sucked. But THINK before you go around giving films 1/10's. Those should only be preserved for extremely rare cases. Even films I LOATHE like "Identity Theif", "Just go with it" or "TDKR" I rate based on ALL factors.

If you rate this film on all merits, only a total juvenile moron would rate it a one out of ten or even CONSIDER it to be NEAR the worst movies ever.

[–] naples-884-346409 10 years ago

Give me a fu*kin break, man!

There was nothing "competent" about this film at all.

It was totally shocking to see that this ultra cheap-looking C-comedy actually cost over 75 mill. dollars....amazing.
Where did the money go?

This film cost more than "Jurassic Park", really!

The cinematography looked cheap...and I'm a fan of Robert Elswit.

Walken & Pacino's perfomances rank at the bottom of their careers...and they were the best about this.

Bartha's 'retarded mix' wasn't believable, just a joke, it was just strange,
not funny most of the time.

The music (and mix) was cheap and, worst of all, used in the wrong way:
Very sudden changes between comedy / melodrama music...without a reason.

There is so much wrong with this film, that I can't believe that the once great
Martin Brest didn't see the mistakes.

Maybe he did it on purpose as a "Fu*k you" to the producers?

I enjoy it as an unintentional comedy.

Brest will never get a job again in the film biz after "Gigli".

This is not only a flop or a bad movie, but the most incompetent screenplay
and direction ever by a former A-list director....

Uwe Boll couldn't have made a worse movie even if he tried.

[–] knoxfan2008 10 years ago

Bartha's 'retarded mix' wasn't believable, just a joke, it was just strange,
not funny most of the time.

Which is something I said. I said Bartha's performance sucked. So dumb point there....

The music was cheap and, worst of all, used in the wrong way:
Very sudden changes between comedy / melodrama music...but there were no reason.

Again, just copying what I said...

This is not only a flop or a bad movie, but the most incompetent screenplay
and direction ever by a former A-list director....

Uwe Boll couldn't have made a worse movie even if he tried.

Thanks for proving my point that only someone who knows nothing about cinema would consider this the worst.

[–] naples-884-346409 10 years ago

'knoxfan', I didn't read all your crap, just the first crazy lines 

I wrote my review not only for you, you're not as important.

It's nice that we agree that the music & Bartha are bad,
but you still defend this movie with ridiculous arguments:

This film was competently shot, the lighting was fine, the sound mixing was reasonable.....But do you forget the really enjoyable Pacino scene? Or the ridiculous Walken scene? Those alone have more entertainment values than many films. ......Some of the dialogue actually was genuinely good, and the stars were eat least trying.

So Pacino was good, yeah ? He was boring and cliché.

There was good dialogue ? Like "Gobble Gobble"? Please, tell us!

The lighting was good ? The film is Elswit's worst. Looks like crap.

The sound mix was good ? It was awful.

This was "competent" ?

You don't know nothin' about filmmaking or cinematography, dumbo

Bartha, watch out, here comes the real 'Brian'...

PS: Yes, this IS the worst film ever made if you consider the talent & budget involved. Nobody expects Boll to deliver, but Brest had talent and fu*ked it up big time.

[–] knoxfan2008 10 years ago

'knoxfan', I didn't read all your crap, just the first crazy lines

It's good to admit your laziness, irrationality and lack of self-awareness. You do most of my work for me so cheers :D

I wrote my review not only for you, you're not as important.

Ummmm... you do realise you commented on MY post right????

There was good dialogue ? Like "Gobble Gobble"? Please, tell us!

"A *beep* untouchable, unhaveable, unattainable brick wall *beep* dike-a-saurus rexi"

"I am the rule of *beep* cool! You wanna be a gangster? You wanna be a thug? You sit at my *beep* feet and gather the pearls that emanate forth from me! Because I'm the *beep* original, straight-first-foremost, pimp-mack, *beep* hustler, original gangster's gangster!"

"That's why these lesbians are always going out and buyin'... spendin' all their dough on like, ya know, sexual appliances and erotic monkey wrenches and *beep* tryin' to compensate for what they don't have... The penis."

Sure, it's dialogue in a *beep* movie, but it isn't generic and if it were written by Tarantino, you would praise it endlessly.

The sound mix was good ? It was awful.

These are some stellar responses right here....

You don't know nothin' about filmmaking or cinematography, dumbo

I know enough that this isn't one of the worst films ever. You are a child, some brat who has only seen huge blockbusters, so you have no idea about the variety you can find in cinema. Yes there is far better cinematography. But why don't you actually go out and look for more films, because if you genuinely believe no films have worse cinematography, then you are just proving my point again and again.

ALSO!!!!!!!!! I just read your post on Marc Forster

Forster is a pretty good director, one of the few in Hollywood taking risks
and trying something new with every film.
Sometimes the results were great.

Thanks for proving to me how ridiculous you are. Only someone who has no Idea about film, could have a broad understanding of most popular film-makers, and STILL call Forster (a studio hack) good.

[–] naples-884-346409 10 years ago

Knoxy,

this week I saw a lot of the 'worst films ever' including "The Room" and let me tell you, that "Gigli" beats them all, especially because of the top talent involved. It's unique.

Do you know any other A-list directed, starring 75 mill. dollar fiasco like that? I don't.

Brest tried to imitate Tarantino & Leonard, but this is crappy dialogue.

And yes, Marc Forster is one of the more interesting ones in Hollywood
and made some great films.

[–] knoxfan2008 10 years ago

Do you know any other A-list directed, starring 75 mill. dollar fiasco like that? I don't.

Yes, Jack and Jill, Just go with it, Identity Thief, The Book Thief, Tammy, Mortal Kombat, Tranformers 2 and 3, After Earth, Grown ups 2, Get Hard, Jurassic World, Ted 2, WWZ, A million Ways to die in the west, Norbit, Cop Out, Wish I was Here, The Carrie remake, Devil's knot, most found footage horror films. That is a list only comprised from the last couple of YEARS!

Also, the criteria isn't "worst A-list film ever" It's "Worst film ever" And you are ridiculous if you find The Room more competently shot, acted and written. You are lying to make a point.

but this is crappy dialogue.

No, not all of it. Take some of Tarantinos dialogue, and put it in a worse film and it becomes pretentious crap. That's what Gigli is.

And yes, Marc Forster is one of the more interesting ones in Hollywood
and made some great films.

You mean like Quantum of Solace? One of the most hated Bond films? Or World War Z? A film so poorly handled that it went years over schedule AND budget, Brad Pitt hated it and Forster, it had a pathetic, watered down rating with no blood, poor cgi, bland characters, terrible acting (especially from the kids), went through 20 million dollars of re-writes and turned out to be one of the most cliched films ever?

Or Machine Gun preacher? A film that looks so much like a lifetime film in both cinematography and melodrama, I was baffled it actually had a cinematic release.

Sure, his early films had promise, but Monster's ball is pretty much a nothing film without Halle Berry's performance. And his other films are simply 'good' and not much more.