That's What She Said (2012)

How bad is it? Unfunny comedy.
Should you see it? No.

Alia Shawkat and Anne Heche star as DeeDee and Bebe, who meet up with a third woman (no, not CeeeCeee, but Clementine) and explore terrible dating situations in New York. The humor is broad (pun unintended) and forced and centers on one woman constantly scratching a yeast infection in public and dildos falling out of purses. This was the time when they started making raunchy guy comedies starring women; this one actually has notes of the classic "The Women" but knowing that just makes it worse.

Terror Inside (2008)

How bad is it? Dull horror.
Should you see it? No.

I'm guessing that the fact that this film stars Corey Feldman decides whatever people think of it. There's a virus that switches people's perceptions of pain and pleasure, so everyone starts mutilating themselves. Then they figure it out and there's a terrible "We're the government. We'll take that - and not do anything bad with it. (wink, wink)" ending. There's some gore and nudity, about enough to turn away a lot of people and not enough to appeal to those who seek it out. Besides the weak plot, the acting isn't much and there's not much of interest.

Terror House (1998)

aka The House That Screamed

How bad is it? Extremely low budget horror, poorly done.
Should you see it? No.

The Polonia brothers have made dozens of extremely cheap horror films. This is one of the earlier ones, shot on video and without access to computer graphics or editing (or actors or script writers or cameramen...) The plot is more than a century old: people are offered money to spend the night in a spooky house. This film is very padded - you get to see them check every single doorknob in the house once they're locked in - and still runs just over an hour. The acting is particularly sub-par, with the blind actor obviously looking around. The monster is a mask, wig, rubber hands and torn clothes.

Ten Violent Women (1982)

aka 10 Violent Women

How bad is it? Women in prison film lacking in nudity and violence.
Should you see it? No.

I actually got to see this in a grindhouse in New York City when it came out; there were a lot of disappointed men in the audience. The film starts with eight women (the title almost forces you to count; there are various numbers of women throughout the film) working in a gold mine that is just a cave and wearing very unsafe gear for a mine. There's an accident which causes them to rob a bank - the logic isn't there - the plans for which are unnecessarily complicated. Then they get caught and go to prison, where there's a sadistic lesbian warden (of course) but none of the sex or violence you'd expect. They end up escaping and the film ends with belly dancing on a yacht, which makes as much sense as anything in this mess. Ted V. Mikels films actually got worse over the years, lacking the crude cheap silliness of the earlier films; this was made in the mid-1970's and shelved for years.

Zombies vs the Lucky Exorcist (2015)

How bad is it? Vanity mishmash hullaballoo (yeah I said that).
Should you see it? Not really.

Written, directed, produced and starring Jaguar Lim, a Malaysian businessman, this film has both eastern and western types of vampires and a giant floating banana. What it lakes is plot, taste and a reason for existing. Aimed at children (I expect) and meant to be funny (I expect), this is amusing for a short time and rapidly becomes tedious, as continuous weirdness tends. The "star" plays maybe seven roles, at least three in drag. People get urinated on. There are jumper cables on nipples. An umbilical cord gets cut by machete. Again, I think this was aimed at children - what kind of children, I can't imagine. This film is so obscure, it isn't on IMDb; people who will watch anything with "Zombie" in the title directed me to it. I'm including it because it's possible that regional films from Asia will replace regional films from the USA as the next big thing in bad films (I'll get to a recently discovered regional film from Turkey eventually).

The Yesterday Machine (1963)

How bad is it? Pretty bad indeed.
Should you see it? Yes. It's a minor camp classic.

This isn't the worst "bring Hitler back" film of 1963; that would be "They Saved Hitler's Brain." This isn't the worst film to come out of Texas in the 1960's; that would be "Manos: Hands of Fate." Still, that's some company in which to be. The plot, which the film takes some time to get to, what with starting out with a baton twirling exhibition, involves a Nazi scientist who developed a time machine 20 years too late to win the war. But wait - with a time machine, it's never too late! The low point of the film is a lecture on how time travel works - it's nearly 10 minutes! - which had me thinking of the judge's never-ending soliloquy in "The Violent Years." There's some poor acting, some atrocious (but genuine) accents and some very 1960's hairstyles. It's all very silly, but a bit slow.

Wrath of the Skunk Ape (1997)

aka Wrath of the Skunkape

How bad is it? It's the worst home movie you've ever seen.
Should you see it? Only for debates of what the world's worst movie is.

I'd heard about this only once and then a decade later the makers put it on YouTube. You can also buy it now from the director, but I can't imagine why you would. The Skunk Ape is like Sasquatch or the Jersey Devil, a regional monster, which differs from those in its odor. This 40 minute film is about a guy (nicknamed Stinky Thumbs) who's hunting it. Much of the film is underlit and at night, so it's hard to see, which might be a good thing. There's an actor who's so annoying that it must be intentional and he's annoying in exactly the same way as an actor in"Barn of the Blood Llama," so there must be some small group of people who think acting consists in being as obnoxious as possible. Even those involved in making this feel that it's their worst film - their others all qualify as zero-budget zero-star films.

The Walking Deceased (2015)

How bad is it? Very poor spoof.
Should you see it? No.

This spoofs "The Walking Dead," plus just about anything else from the recent zombie genre and, though it's better than Epic Movie/Disaster Movie/etc., it's not good. There are running gags that become tiresome. The plot has a guy coming out of a coma to find the zombie apocalypse has happened and then he and a few others (all named for their hometowns) search for a Safe Haven Ranch, which isn't all what it sounds like. There's a couple of chuckles - and I seem to like what no one else does, that a character has to explain that he's not a zombie, he's just a bit slow - but not nearly enough.

Weapons (2007)

How bad is it? Failed indie message film.
Should you see it? No.

Having seen the 2002 French film "Irreversible," I can tell you that this is a medium-budget American teen version of that film, with jumps in the time of sequences, rather than a strict reverse chronology. It also differs in that it sucks. Nick Cannon is the biggest name (Kareem Abdul-Jabbar has a cameo) and he is not a great actor. A number of seemingly unconnected violent scenes end up getting connected, but it doesn't hold one's interest.

Vibrations (1996)

How bad is it? Weird cliched implausible melodrama.
Should you see it? This has developed a cult, so I'll say yes.

Guy (James Marshall) loses his hands in a fight with rednecks, becomes a drunk, sleeps it off where a rave's happening and a girl (Christina Applegate) invites him home, in the first improbable moment of a million. Her friends, robotics wizards - of course - create new hands for him; the rubber flesh hands are distractingly hilarious, the metallic ones lead to a new career as a DJ who's supposedly an android. There's a lot, and I mean a lot, of early 1990's techno music by bands that were huge in that tiny niche for a moment and unknown outside it. There's a subplot with a cop dad that's a real headscratcher. Nary a cliche was overlooked, no plot too improbable was overlooked, and it's all overplayed, except by Marshall, who has so few expressions that he might just be an android.

Viktor (2014)

How bad is it? Failed crime film.
Should you see it? No.

Gerard Depardieu and Elizabeth Hurley star in this noir-ish film about a man seeking revenge for the death of his son. It's well-shot, but extremely sluggish, with no chemistry between the romantic leads (who are both past the age for this - Depardieu in his late 60's) and some unintentional humor in seeing people obviously reading their lines and speaking pho-net-i-call-y, as only the main cast speak English as a first language. The worst bit is that the star doesn't even go after the bad guys, he sends others to do it.

10 Rules for Sleeping Around (2014)

How bad is it? 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, 1 on Metacritic.
Should you see it? NO.

The less said about this "comedy," the better. A couple sees if infidelity can help their marriage. It doesn't.

That's What She Said (2012)

How bad is it? I hated it.
Should you see it? No.

"Bridesmaids" was a guy film (like "The Hangover") done with women and a lot of people liked it. I did not; Kristen Wiig, who I usually hate was actually good and Ellie Kemper is always good, but the film irritated me. So - that said, this is a bad "Bridesmaids" clone starring Anne Heche. I'm just not the audience for this. I don't think there is an audience for this. I hope there isn't an audience for this. The plot: three women mismanage relationships while being gross; there are dildos falling from purses, public yeast infection scratchings and... not one funny joke.

Teddy Bears' Picnic (2002)

How bad is it? Meandering satire.
Should you see it? No. The cast is intriguing, however.

Written, directed and produced by Harry Shearer (who also gave himself a cameo and did background voices and composed songs), this has a HUGE cast including: John Michael Higgins, Ming-Na (Wen), Henry Gibson, David Rasche, Brenda Strong, Morgan Fairchild, Michael McKean, Alan Thicke, George Wendt, Bob Einstein, John O'Hurley, Howard Hesseman, Fred Willard, Annabelle Gurwitch, Peter Marshall, Kurtwood Smith, Larry Miller and some sportscasters such as Dick Butkus and Jim Nance. Now, if you're thinking "aren't those TV actors?" you may see the problem - this is a 10 minute TV sketch stretched to 90 minutes. The story has the elite of the elite meeting at a retreat and the intrigues and complications that come with that. Much of it is improvised; little of it is funny.

Top Dog (1995)

How bad is it? It's a Chuck Norris comedy. Yeah, you read that right.
Should you see it? No.

This film had been done better as "Turner and Hooch," so what was the idea - to give Chuck Norris' brother another directorial credit? The film is about a police officer who has a dog attached to him, though he dislikes dogs. The dog not only sniffs out bombs and drugs, but in one scene even sniffs out a hidden switch, with no explanation of how that's possible. The major problem with the film is that it's aimed at kids, being filled with lovable dog antics, but the story-line involves bigotry, assassination and more weapons fired than in any PG-13 film I'd ever seen - and it has surly Norris doing very little martial arts, not as well as he used to, and with an obvious body double in much of it. The intended jokes don't work, as these are not comedic actors and Norris can't play straight-man.

The Zero Boys (1986)

How bad is it? Amateurish mishmash of genres. Not terrible.
Should you see it? Yes. It's entertaining and has developed a cult.

This got a Blu-Ray release; that fact by itself puts this film ahead of most things I review, though it does make the fog machines more obvious. The film starts off looking like something it's not and you eventually find out you've been watching a paintball game. Then the winners and their girlfriends and a girl won from the losing team head into the woods where they find a secluded cabin... and it becomes a "cabin in the woods" film, where two guys who make snuff films and happen to be cannibals hunt our young stars. The six heroes just happen to have access to automatic weapons - the first groaner of a mistake the film makes. There's no gore or sex and most of the standard tropes of this kind of film are avoided, making it a bit of an oddity. The ending is pretty bad and the bad guys, once seen, don't seem like what you'd expect. The only name in the cast is Kelli Maroney, who seemed to be in a lot of films in 1986.

Wham Bam Thank You Spaceman (1975)

aka Wham! Bam! Thank You, Spaceman!


How bad is it? One of the worse porn comedies of the 1970's.
Should you see it? It's only for completists of someone in it.

Another film I snuck in to see when underaged, this has been released by Something Weird Video in an edited soft-core version (there's also a hard-core). Two aliens come to Earth to impregnate women - that's it; that's the plot. The aliens are quite cheap; they have balloons for ears that expand when aroused. The only reason to see this is for brief bits by Dyanne Thorne, Haji and Sandy Carey. None of the comedy works and the quality is about what you'd expect from the director of "Blackenstein."

Weekend With the Babysitter (1970)

How bad is it? Pointless, dated and unoriginal.
Should you see it? No

This makes me laugh. Sorry.

I watched this (probably for the second time) and wondered why people either thought this was great or thought it was terrible; I think it all boils down to the cult around the writer/director Don Henderson, who it appears is actually Tom "Billy Jack" Laughlin. It's almost the same film as the earlier "The Babysitter," which has some of the same character names and some of the same actors and almost the same plot, though the characters (or the actors' approaches to them) are different. There's a middle-aged film director having a fling with his teen-aged babysitter, smoking pot and racing motorcycles, while his wife is going through heroin withdrawal and getting used by her dealer. There's some silly dated dialogue and some rather icky romantic scenes, but not enough to make it watchable.

Warriors of the Apocalypse (1985)

aka Time Raiders, aka Searchers of the Voodoo Mountain, aka Operation Overkill

How bad is it? Typical Filipino post-apocalypse fantasy (not good).
Should you see it? I don't think so.

Look at the various titles and you'll see how confused this film is. This film starts off as one kind of film, a Road Warriors-esque post-apocalypse film, and then becomes an amazons film; the two films don't really work together and neither is great on its own. There's a search for the secret to immortality and a nuclear reactor in a mountain and a bunch of guys in ludicrous outfits (there's some shoulder pads almost worth the price of admission) and then there's amazons that shoot laser beams from their eyes and pygmies with make-up that looks like a KISS cover band. There's so much stuff thrown at the screen that you'd think something would have to be interesting, but it's overlong, the typical nudity and fight scenes are way below par (but not bad enough to be enjoyably bad) and your eyes just start to glaze over.

Waitress! (1981)

How bad is it? Lame comedy.
Should you see it? No.

Co-directed by Lloyd Kaufman, this was re-released in a box set by his Troma company with other early - and poor - comedies they had rights to. A failing restaurant, complete with all stereotypes, including slovenly chef, has three waitresses with their own story arcs. One is the boss's daughter. One is writing an article on picking up/seducing men. One wants to be an actress. None are compelling. The humor is forced and sophomoric. Calvert DeForest has two lines and Chris Noth is in the background of one scene.

Video Vixens (1974)

How bad is it? Failed comedy by hard-core porn director.
Should you see it? Only if you're a big fan of someone in the cast.

Robyn Hilton. You remember her with red hair in "Blazing Saddles."

I saw this by sneaking into a theater when it came out; it's been released on video by Troma. Directed by Henri Pachard, who's directed hundreds of porn films, this was meant as a sort of cross-over to mainstream, but it has enough nudity - and unending, mind-numbing bad sex jokes - to be X (NC-17) rated. A soap additive has stopped men's interest in sex and is turning women into lesbians, so a TV station decides to run a Stag Film Award Show and host it with a guy who's offended by the whole premise. George "Buck" Flower, Rainbeaux Smith and Robyn Hilton have roles, as do a lot of women who did mostly porn. In between segments, there's fake ads for Twinkle Twat Feminine Spay, Dial-a-Snatch, Magic Merkin, Kentucky Dildos, Roid Away and Umpire Deodorant (the last one, if you're wondering, involves a lot of ball jokes). It's pretty tiresome, to be honest, but it has some novelty value.

Vasectomy - A Delicate Matter (1986)

aka Vasectomy

How bad is it? Unfunny comedy.
Should you see it? No. The cast is interesting, but no.

Paul Sorvino plays a bank manager whose wife, after their 8th child, insists he has a vasectomy, but he has reservations. There's also an unrelated plot of his boss, Lorne Greene, tasking him with saving the company from thieving relatives. There's some interesting cameos: Abe Vigoda, William Marshall, June Wilkinson and Debra Jo Fondren (who does a topless scene; she was best-known for her pretty knee-length blonde hair, cut before this was filmed). There is not one laugh, though there's potential - both the doctor and nurse for his operation have reason to dislike him, for example (and though we know they're too professional to let that interfere with their work, it could create tension. It doesn't).

Vampire Raiders - Ninja Queen (1988)

aka The Vampire Raiders

How bad is it? Perhaps the worst Godfrey Ho film, which is saying something.
Should you see it? If you absolutely must watch a Godfrey Ho film, this is a good choice.

I'm planning a post with 20-25 more Godfrey Ho films, which are largely interchangeable - he takes two unrelated films and splices them together to make a new, often incomprehensible, one. This one has the hopping vampires that get killed by putting papers on their faces (it's a Chinese thing - it does not translate well) and a second story about a plan to take over the hotel industry. There's two groups of ninjas, one good, one bad. A couple are killed by a thrown pig. A vampire feels up a female ninja. There's extending arms and exploding heads and flying just above the ground. And lots of nonsense, before the climactic battle that makes no sense.

2069: A Sex Odyssey

How bad is it? Typical exploitation parody. Not terrible.
Should you see it? If you like this kind of thing, sure.

Women from Venus come to Earth to collect semen. Men generally cooperate gladly. Filmed in German, the new English language jokes are hit and miss (mostly miss). I like that people just assume the aliens are the French ski team. The only special effect is the women bounding like astronauts do in real life on the Moon, but it doesn't make sense. The fashions are fun... surprisingly, and the bodies on display (none of the cast is familiar to me) are rather nice. If "Barbarella" is the high point of sexy sci-fi of the era and "Flesh Gordon" is the low, this is a comfy middle.

Just wondering

Not that it matters, but just who is it that's linking some of these posts to their Facebook account? "Worm Eaters" got an extra 150 hits, for example, and I'm wondering who my popular friend is.

Tintorera: Killer Shark (1977)

aka Tintorera, aka Tintorera... Bloody Waters, aka Tintorera - The Solent Death, aka Tintorera... Tiger Shark

How bad is it? Interminable soft-core "Jaws" rip-off.
Should you see it? If you're watching shark movies, it's one of the better "bad" ones.

There's a number of versions of this one, the longest I've seen about 126 minutes (I believe there are longer ones) and all have maybe 3 minutes of shark attack scenes. Three shark hunters go on a sporting holiday - and there are a TON of critters getting harvested - and there's several love triangles turned into threesomes. Susan George and Hugo Stiglitz are the big name in the cast, Rene Cardona, Jr. directed. There's a lot of nudity, some nice bodies among them, but surprisingly little sex. The film is not really about sharks, but people, and it's unfair to compare it to "Jaws," which it obviously was trying to cash in on. It's very slow and stupid, but it's pretty and rather watchable.

The Telephone (1988)

How bad is it? Failed experimental theater.
Should you see it? No. Unless you enjoy trainwrecks.

The owl's the best thing in the film.

Written by Harry Nilsson and Terry Southern... and directed by Rip Torn... and starring Whoopi Goldberg. Just let that sink in for a bit. It's a one woman show, essentially a monologue, with brief interactions with Wlliott Gould, John Heard and the voice of Herve Villechaize. The whole premise is Whoopi's an out of work actress who passes the time making phone calls, mostly pranks, and she does a variety of bad accents and impersonations and we slowly discover she's unhinged. Slowly. She has a pet owl and some goldfish and they give the best performances.