Stevennix2001's Top Ten WORST Films of 2011

Introduction

Although many have criticized film critics by saying their jobs are easy, as all they do is tell their opinions on a movie. Granted, it's a fair point, but I wouldn't call it easy. After all, every critic has to develop their own style, and they have analyze things about a movie that most general audiences would not pay attention to normally; while somehow making their arguments seem rational and engaging to their readers. Plus, it really doesn't help when some of the movies that film critics have to review are giant pieces of crap. Look, if anyone wants to bash film critics by saying their jobs are easy, then that's their business. However, whenever I have to admit to people that I had to review a film like "The Smurfs 3-D", I die a little bit inside, and a part of me wishes that somebody would kill me for ever watching it. Of course, I'm joking, but you get my point.

To be honest, I wasn't sure if I wanted to do a top ten list of the films that I've seen last year, but I figured since almost every other hubber is doing it, then I might as well. Eh, what can I say? I guess I am falling for the old cliche logic, "If all the kids are jumping off a cliff, are you going to do it too?" If by "all the kids are jumping off a cliff", you really mean that all the critics on hubpages are compiling their top ten lists of movies seen last year, then I cannot tell a lie....Yes I am... What can I say? All the other cool critics on hubpages are doing it.....

All kidding aside though, I know many of my older readers know that, with the exception of a 2008 top ten list, I normally never do one of these. Let alone a top ten worst films of anything. Why? Because I generally don't think it's fair for each film, as it's hard enough as it is to try to see every movie that comes out per year; thus I wouldn't want to end up leaving a film out merely because I didn't get a chance to see it. However, as I've come to read many other top ten lists, I figured why not? After all, it is a list based solely on my opinion anyway, so what's the harm?

As I stated before, I have not seen all the films of 2011, so this top ten worst films is solely based on the worst films that I've seen come out in 2011; thus if I neglect to mention a film that you might think it worse than what I listed, then you pretty much know why because...I either haven't seen the movie you think should be on here, or maybe I just don't think it's that bad to make this list.

Another note worth pointing out is that I won't be publishing my top ten best films of 2011, until after the Oscars. Therefore, I do apologize for the wait, but I feel it's only fair that way. But for now, lets dive right into the worst films of 2011.

10. Season of the Witch

When I first saw the trailer to this movie, I thought to myself that this will probably be one of those under rated fantasy films that'll more than likely bomb at the box office; while being harshly bashed by most film critics who don't understand the fantasy genre of movies. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that all critics are like this, but most of them often fail to see the symbolism and metaphors in a fantasy film; which leads me to believe most are too harsh when it comes to a fantasy and science fiction movie. Having said all that, this was one of the movies last year that I was deeply looking forward to, as I felt the premise of it alone made worth seeing. Unfortunately, I was wrong...

Not only did this film fail to meet any of my expectations, but the pro-religious message it conveys comes off as overly preachy around the end, to where you just wish they'd shut up about it. No, I'm not an agnostic or atheist, nor do I care what religious preference a person has, as that's entirely up to each individual. And having a pro-religious film isn't necessarily a bad thing either, as "Prince of Egypt" still ranks as one of my all time favorite animated films.

My philosophy is that as long as you don't tell me how to live my life, then I won't tell you how to live yours. Fair enough, right? Anyway, the promise what this movie could have been is what really gets to me, as this could have been a deeply engaging controversial film about religion itself. It could have not only forced it's audience to question the very fabric of religion, and the church, but it could presented an epic story on par with such films like "Last Temptation of Christ", to present a controversially perplex movie.

In fact, if you watch merely the beginning of this movie, you can see a great build up in the story. A man sees the evil of the endless battles fighting in the crusades; which causes him to lose his faith along with his comrade. They both become drifters scouring the land for shelter, until they're hired to escort a woman who everyone believes is a witch, but she seems like a harmless little girl. Granted, from hearing this premise, one might think there's a load of possibilities for creating a great story, but you'd be wrong. Not only is every plot twist predictable as sin in this movie, but the film never even tries to be subtle about the message it's trying to convey. I think had this film made it's message a bit more subtle, and made it a lot less obvious on what the girl actually is, then this movie might have turned out a lot better. Unfortunately, this is arguably the most disappointing film of 2011.

9. Just Go With It

Adam Sandler really struck out in 2011. Not only did he make a travesty of a film in "Jack and Jill", we're also treated to this half a** romantic comedy. Although I can normally forgive a lot of things in a Adam Sandler film, as I think anyone who expects any kind of groundbreaking performance from him is simply kidding themselves. Heck, if anyone truly expects any kind of Oscar worthy movie from him, then you're going to be disappointed one hundred percent of the time. However, that's not why fans of Adam Sandler watch any of his films. No, his movies are mainly based on pure escapism, and nothing more. He's not out to make any movies with stellar stories, art direction, character development, and etc. No, most of this films are designed to entertain, and make people laugh.

Unfortunately, this isn't one of those films. Unlike most of Sandler's romantic comedies, where he can somehow come off as the lovable smart a**, or the lovable moron, this movie makes him come off more as the sad pathetic loser, who feels the need to con women into sleeping with him. Yet, he's a good guy though...according to this film. As I mentioned earlier in my review of "Jack and Jill", all of his films are nothing if not extremely predictable; thus I don't expect much else from his movies. However, I do expect to laugh from his films, and this movie did nothing for me. Not one chuckle, giggle, or grins. No, all this film provides is a lot of awkward pointless moments; along with many various recycled jokes that were used in some of Sandler's other romantic comedies that were done a helluva a lot better.

8. No Strings Attached

To all my readers, I have a huge confession to make. I've always loathed, despised, hated, detested, and disliked the romantic comedy genre in movies, for as long as I can remember. Don't get me wrong, there are quite a few diamonds in the rough that are good like "Crazy, Stupid, Love" and "500 Days of Summer" for instance. But for every "500 Days of Summer", we always end up with like over a million really bad romantic comedy movies that tend to fall into every damn cliche in the book; which makes most of them come off as boring as sin.

This is why it takes a lot to impress me with this genre, and lets just say that "No Strings Attached" does absolutely nothing to impress me at all. Not only is the chemistry between Natalie Portman and Ashton Kutcher come off as ill contrived and forced half the time in this movie, but the dialogue is just horrendously terrible to the point of being severally distracting. In fact, the only good thing about this movie is the supporting cast, but even they're not good enough to save this movie.

7. Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1

To be honest, I'm not going to go on record saying that any of the "Twilight" films are among the worst films that I've ever seen, but there is a bit of an annoyance to them. In every film, I can always sense a hint of what it could be if the script had been done right, and maybe there had been a bit more effort put into it like the acting, directing, and etc. Yet, it never happens. Going into each "Twilight" film, I always try to approach each film with an open mind, and I'm always disappointed to some degree at the end of each film.

Although, I will admit that I have been a bit too hard on Robert Pattinson in these movies, as some of my readers have been quick to point out, and I apologize for that. Besides, it's not his fault why the film series is so freakishly terrible. No, Robert Pattinson is just miscast in a role as Edward, as he's actually a good actor if anyone ever bothers to watch "Water for Elephants" and "Remember Me." Plus, from what I've seen of his work, he's basically the type of actor that not only needs a great script to work with to be successful, but he can only play himself on screen. Anytime you force him to play outside his own character, then you genuinely get an uninspired performance like we see in the "Twilight" series. Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad thing.

After all, Brad Pitt can only play Brad Pitt in a movie. Same thing with John Wayne too, as I dare any movie fan out there to name ONE movie that John Wayne did where you did not believe for a split second that it was John Wayne playing a role. Don't worry. I'll wait. Not that I'm comparing Robert Pattinson to John Wayne or Brad Pitt, but the point is that all these actors can only play themselves doing a role..and there's nothing wrong with that at all. Besides, not all actors can be as versatile as someone like Heath Ledger, where they can go from one movie being a gay cowboy, from "Brokeback Mountain", to an insane narcissistic psychopath in "The Dark Knight."

However, whenever I see a "Twilight" film, all I can ever think about is how much untapped potential is wasted on each movie, which is probably one of the most infuriating things about this franchise. Unfortunately, I can't judge a film off potential, as I have to judge it for what it is, and for what the current film series happens to be, it's a giant piece of garbage....enough said.

6. Beastly

What do you get when you mix "Dawson's Creek" with the classic fairy tale, "Beauty and the Beast?" Well, you end up with "Beastly"....oh joy...... The film is allegedly about some self absorbed high school pretty boy, who believes looks and idolized perfection is everything. However, when he pulls a prank on the wrong classmate, who happens to be a real life witch, he gets turned into a hideously disfigured man. Like the original story, he locks himself away from the rest of society due to his ugly new features. And, the only way to break said curse is to get a girl to fall in love with him before a designated time, or he'll remain hideously disfigured forever. Damn those witches. (No, I'm not prejudiced against witches, as that was merely a joke. I'm sure all witches rock and kick a**)

Anyway, I'm sure everyone that's ever heard this story play out a thousand times like I have, then you should pretty much have a general idea how this story plays out. Nothing new is added to the story, as the only originality this film presents is the fact that it happens to be taking place in modern times. Yet, even that novelty wears off fast, as the rest of the story comes off as a gigantic bore, and falls into every single damn stereotypical Hollywood love story cliche in the book; while delivering arguably some of the worst acting that you'll ever see in a movie.

Oh well. At least, this movie had Neil Patrick Harris to add some effort into this half a** production of a movie. Otherwise, this would've been ranked way higher than it was listed here.

Sucker Punch- Samurai Fight

5. Sucker Punch

Quite possibly the most visually stunning film that I've ever seen, and if it got nominated for "Best visual effects", "Best sound effects", "best art direction", "best costume designs", "best sound editing" and "best cinematography", in this year's Oscars, then I certainly wouldn't have an issue with it. After all, it's a very beautiful film in term of style. It's a real shame the rest of this movie stinks.

Not only does "Sucker Punch" present arguably one of the most confusing stories ever written for a movie, but nothing about it makes any sense. Granted, it does seem like Zach Snyder was trying to blur the lines of reality and fantasy with this movie, but to what end? Don't get me wrong, I love the fact that he was trying to be original with the story, but there's no solid narrative to it, or any kind of direction to at least help us understand what's going on better. The story is all over the map, and whenever it does slow down, none of the scenes make sense. Granted, the fantasy elements of this movie are used to convey a strong symbolic meaning, but since the film lacks any kind of focus or direction, the symbolism behind the story gets lost rather easily.

In the end, I would have to say this is probably the most beautiful bad movie that I've ever seen, since "Independence Day", and I didn't even think that was possible...

4. Insidious

The return of a sub genre of horror that many feared might have become truly extinct in Hollywood is back. Although it seems like slasher films and "found videos" are starting to grow rapidly in the horror genre, it really has been a while since we've gotten a good old fashioned haunted house movie. In fact, it's a real shame too, as I bet all it would take is for one great movie to bring this almost forgotten sub genre back into mainstream pop culture again.

Unfortunately, "Insidious" isn't such a good movie. Not only did this film suffer from various plot holes, poor character development, poor direction, and an insanely predictable story, but it wasn't even remotely scary.

Don't get me wrong, I do applaud Hollywood for trying to bring back the haunted house sub genre of horror, as it's been a while since we've gotten a good one. Unfortunately, we might have to wait even longer for this sub genre to come back, as "Insidious" isn't that good, nor is it worth wasting any time on.

Source

3. Alvin and the Chipmunks- Chipwrecked

Granted, I'll be the first to admit that none of my reviews were any good on the live action films, since I mostly said things along the line of "The movie stinks, the characters are annoying, and it lacks any kind of derivative originality, but you can't expect much from a movie based on talking chipmunks." Sure, I do say a lot more than that, but you get the general idea. However, I'm going to make up for that now, as I'll try to explain exactly why this movie was so horrendously terrible.

First of all, I was not the biggest fan in the world of the chipmunks, as a child. No, like "Captain Planet", "Alvin and the Chipmunks" was just one of those run of the mill 80's cartoons that I only watched whenever there was nothing good to watch. Yes, I am aware they were originally created in the 60's, but I grew up with the 80's version. As I was saying, I wasn't the biggest fan of this franchise, but I did like the animated film, "Chipmunk Adventure." Although, it ranks as a slightly above average film, in my book, and I certainly would never compare it to any of Disney's best animated features (i.e. "Aladdin", "Sleeping Beauty", "Beauty and the Beast" and etc). But for what the film was, I actually enjoyed it as a child, and I still do as an adult.

I know that might sound silly to some people, but please hear me out before judging. Although "Chipmunk Adventure" wasn't a great film, but it had it's own unique charm all it's own. Sure, the story was predictable, and in the end, the chipmunks don't really seem to change at all throughout the course of the film. If anything, Alvin is still the little smart a** that he's always been. Simon is still the geeky one, and Theodore is still the fat innocent one. Brittany still acts like the stuck up prom queen who's conceited, while the rest of the chippettes act like female versions of their alleged boyfriend counterparts. But if that's the case, then why am I praising the "Chipmunk Adventure?"

Although the movie is fairly predictable, the magic of the movie wasn't so much where the movie was going to go, as everyone who's seen the trailer already knows how this film was going to end. No, the real magic of the "Chipmunk Adventure" came from the journey itself. Yes, you knew that, at some point, they were going to get from point "A" to point "B", but it's how they get there that made the movie so special, and original in a lot of ways.

Not only was the background animation beautifully done, but you could definitely tell the animators made excellent use out of the settings for the story. The film essentially follows the Chipmunks competing with the Chippettes in a race around the world, which is being run by two crooked criminals who're actually using them for a diamond smuggling scheme. Yes, we all know that everything will be okay, the bad guys will get what's coming to them, and most of their songs are derived from other bands of the time period. However, it's the journey itself that makes "Chipmunk Adventure" a great film to watch.

In one scene for example, Alvin and Brittany argue, in Rome, about who's the better rock band. Granted, they could have started singing right there in that scene, but they didn't. No, the animators took advantage of this layout perfectly, as the chipmunks and chippettes raced across town up to a Roman abandoned setting that not only helped create one of the best choreographed animated scenes of the film, but the artistry and creativity of the background layouts were simply breathtaking. Sure, there was some inconsistencies in the animation of the characters, but the use of the settings and beautiful artwork really made the original film fun to watch.

That's why it pains me to have watch "Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked" so much. Not only does the film lack any kind of originality to it, but it doesn't even try to produce anything creative. Like the scene where some woman asks them who they are on a deserted island, they just do a quick song verse of a popular singer, and that's it. No running around to take advantage of the beautiful scenery, or setting, while singing. Seriously, where's the creativity? Where's the imagination? Sure, the original 80's version of "Alvin and the Chipmunks" wasn't great either, but at least, the animators of that show and "Chipmunk Adventure" TRIED to produce something resembling quality. Unfortunately, if you're expecting quality from this movie, then you're wasting your time here, as this film offers none of that.

It's been said that the original creators aren't involved in the live action movies at all, like they were in the previous Chipmunk adaptations, so I guess that explains why this franchise lost it's punch...

2. Smurfs 3-D

Let me put it you this way. If I have more fun writing a review, while pretending to be someone else instead of writing it as myself, then that's not a good sign for any movie. Granted, I can be EXTREMELY forgiving when it comes to most family and kids films, as you can't take them too seriously. However, if you produce a family film where none of the characters are even the least bit likable and/or interesting, while basing most of your humor on derivative nonsense that most third graders would even deem immature, then you pretty much know that your making a bad movie.

Not only is every character, in this film, annoying as sin, but not even the acting style of Neil Patrick Harris could save this movie. To make matters even worse, the adult humor that some kid films insert to appeal to older viewers isn't that funny. No, if anything, it just comes off as weird and very disturbing in a lot of ways.

1. Jack and Jill

Okay, I have another huge confession to make to all my readers...I am a closet Adam Sandler fan. No, this is not a joke. Please don't look at me, as it's not easy admitting that I am a fan of his; especially considering that most of the films he makes don't often fall into what most critics would deem acceptable. And to be honest, I don't think any true Adam Sandler fan out there really expects anything more than a few cheap laughs whenever they see his films.

Heck, I'm not going to lie here, as that's the only reason I even bother to watch any of his movies if at all. I don't expect any kind of great story from his films, as it's all about the entertainment factor when it comes to Adam Sandler. Unfortunately, this film fails to deliver on every single turn. Yes, I can forgive a lot of things in a Sandler film, but to not only come off as unfunny, but to push the farting jokes, cross dressing comedy, and slapstick to the point of being severely annoying is simply unforgivable in this movie. Seriously, I'm starting to wonder if this film's sole purpose was to make "Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn- Part 1" look better by comparison, as it was released about a week before... In fact, that's probably what this film's true purpose was for...EUREKA!

More by this Author


Comments 19 comments

Nickalooch profile image

Nickalooch 4 years ago from Columbia, MD

I can gladly say I missed a majority of this list. I never thought Season of the Witch would be that good, just never got a good vibe from it.

Insidious, I thought had potential. The writers were talented enough, the director is competent. However, Rose Byrne, who I think is a decent actress, was terrible in this. As was Patrick Wilson, but nothing new there. Not to mention the video you posted with Insidious made me want to walk out of the movie because of how stupid it was.

Again...I can gladly say I never saw Twilight, Jack and Jill, Shipwrecked, Season of the Witch, No Strings Attached, Beastly and Smurfs. Good hub lol


rai2722 profile image

rai2722 4 years ago

Well, I honestly don't have any problem watching Just Go With It and Sucker Punch. I do agree both movies doesn't scripted well, but somewhat still gives me enjoyment when watching it. About Smurfs, I do think it's still suitable for children.


Nightmarephantom profile image

Nightmarephantom 4 years ago from Columbia, MD

I don't understand how Alvin and the chipmunks keep making more movies. Beastly had potential but only on paper. Jack and Jill just looked awful. Poor NPH got roped into the smurfs somehow.


Alecia Murphy profile image

Alecia Murphy 4 years ago from Wilmington, North Carolina

I dodged a hail of ten bullets. Thank you for this list. Adam Sandler was like a lot of people I used to dig in the 90s, funny but it depends on the material and there's nothing worse than when he self-produces. I was dumb enough to see that movie Grown Ups last year but thankfully this year I wised up. I agree with this list completely!


CarltheCritic1291 profile image

CarltheCritic1291 4 years ago

Hey Steve, Just wanted to drop by to share my opinion about the films at hand. Most of them, I didn't see, but I think (considering how you talk about them), I may have dodged a few bullets here :)

"Season of the Witch": True story! I was at the movie theaters, and I saw the poster for this film and I wen up to it, put my hands over it and pretended like I could predict what was going to happen in it... As it turned out I was 100% correct.

"No Strings Attached": Never saw it can't comment, but it looks like it follows the same cliched formula of your typical romantic-comedy.

"Twilight": What can I say, it was awful, but I had fun, and every one who is a fan of the series should check it out because it is exactly what you expect it to be.

"Beastly": This is a film that I was initially going to see because it looked so bad. It's a chick-flick version of the "Beauty and he Beast", what did you think it was going to be like.

"Sucker Punch": Great visuals, crappy story.

"Insidious": [Sad Face] But I LOVED this movie... Actually I don't blame you, "Insidious" was one of those films that you have to know the director before you watch. James Wan is a film maker who is controversial, you either love his bad movies or you can't stand them. "Insidious" might not have been a good movie (by the way I think you meant to say, "Unfortunately, "Insidious" isn't such a good movie", you said, "Unfortunately, "Insidious" isn't such a movie") but for horror movie freaks such as myself, I really liked it. I understand why people would hate it, it had bad cinematography (every shot was hand held and jittery), and that Elise Rainier character had some of the worst dialogue in the film. I guess it's a guilty pleasure at best.

"Alvin and the Chipmunks- Chipwrecked": ... What can I say, you should have seen that coming.

"Smurfs": I Didn't see it, nor do I ever really want to.

"Just Go With It" and "Jack and Jill": There's a reason why Adam Sandler is making bad movies... SCIENCE! You might be thinking, "How does making a bad movie have anything to do with science?" Well, Sandler knows that these movies are indeed bad, BUT he was to see if he can still make money off of them by marketing the fact that big named stars (such as himself) make cameos in the film. So scientifically, he conducted some experiments such as these two horrible films to see if he can still make money off of them.

Great list, I hope you didn't mind me putting forth my opinion, keep up the great work.

Voted Up, and Everything Else :)


Robwrite profile image

Robwrite 4 years ago from Bay Ridge Brooklyn NY

Hi Steve; The only one of these I've seen is "Sucker Punch", which was awful. The rest of them looked so bad that I wouldn't go to seem them in the theater. I'll probably catch some of them on cable. I admit that I was curious about "Beastly" but it sounds pretty bad.

I have never liked Adam Sandler at all, so I'm content to see him on the bottom of the worst-of-the-year list.

Rob


FatFreddysCat profile image

FatFreddysCat 4 years ago from The Garden State

I've only seen two of the films on this list - "Insidious" and "Sucker Punch," really liked "Insidious" but hated "Sucker Punch" with a passion. I can't understand how Zack Snyder took what should've been a can't miss proposition - a gazillion dollar action flick with a cast of scantily clad hot women -- and somehow managed to make it BORING...

As for the rest of the list, I probably wouldn't have bothered with any of'em anyway, but thanks for the heads up and I'll do my best to avoid them!


Megavitamin profile image

Megavitamin 4 years ago

I agree that Adam Sandler had a really terrible year, but he doesn't always play an obnoxious man-child. "Punch Drunk Love" "Reign Over Me" and "Funny People" show he has more in his repertoire than fart jokes. Other than that, I agree with this list...and am glad I avoided half of these movies.


THEHuG5 profile image

THEHuG5 4 years ago

I agree with most of the movies on this list, I honestly just expect Adam sandler movies to be bad and no strings attached was just....terrible. And don't even get me started on Beastly. That movie was a total waste of my time I can't believe they botched the book so badly because I liked the book well enough. The casting in Beastly was totally wrong. I mean I can see Alex P but Vanessa Hudgens, REALLY??

I loved sucker punch though I mean like you said, visually it was amazing. Even though the story sucked the sheer awesomeness of the movie was enough to not make me complain about it. I still don't know what happened at the end of that movie though...oh well.


Paradise7 profile image

Paradise7 4 years ago from Upstate New York

I missed ALL of them. I'm glad, too! The only one I'd even remotely care to see, after Steven's reviews, is Sucker Punch. I love awesome visuals. Movies can really be works of art, in that regard.


alocsin profile image

alocsin 4 years ago from Orange County, CA

I'm proud to say that I've not seen any of these films and don't intend to catch them. Voting this Up and Useful.


Stevennix2001 profile image

Stevennix2001 4 years ago Author

@Nickalooch

Thanks Nick. I'm glad you liked the hub. To be honest, I agree with you that "Insidious" had a lot of potential, but it just didn't live up to it. It's kind of a shame too, as it could've revitalized that sub genre of haunted house films in horror movies.

@rai2722

Well to each their own, and if you liked the film, then that's all that matters, as this hub is just merely sharing my own thoughts and opinions. However, it's fine if you don't agree with me though. As for the "Smurfs" film, I don't think I ever said it wasn't good for kids, but it's not a great family film though, and the adult humor they insert to appeal to older audience just came off as weird. But, that's merely my opinion on the matter. However, I'm sure most kids will still like the film, but I doubt seriously we'll be still talking about the movie fifty years from now. Anyway, thanks for stopping by to read my hub. :)

@nightmarephantom

Well, I got an answer for you about Alvin and the chipmunks. Kids are often too naive to know what a good movie should be like, and most of today's parents don't really care about what family movie to take them to, as long as it keeps their kids happy and quiet. Unfortunately, this also causes the films to make money, so we end up with more films. It's a very vicious cycle. lol.

As for Beastly, I agree that it did have potential to be something way better than what was presented in the end, but it ended up being a mediocre film though. Sad really.

As for NPH being in the smurfs, I think he obviously either did that for a paycheck, or he was just doing it to make some kids happy (i.e. his nephews, cousins or kids or whatever. Sorry, I don't keep track of celebrities' personal lives too often).

Anyway, thanks for stopping by to read my hub, and sharing your thoughts with us.

@alecia murphy

lol. Well, I'm glad you didn't suckered in last year to watch any of Sandler's films. I'm glad you liked the list, and thank you for stopping by to share your thoughts with us. :)

@robwrite

That's cool. Well if you do happen to watch any of these films on cable or something, then I do hope you end up enjoying the films way more than I did on some level. These films just weren't my cup of tea, but I certainly wouldn't blame anyone for liking them. Anyway, thanks for stopping by rob. :)

@fatfreddycat

lol. Yeah, you're right about Snyder, as only he can make a film featuring great visuals with hot girls seem boring as sin. Heck, as bad as McG is as a director, he was able to at least give us "Charlie's Angels." Not a great film either, but at least, you weren't bored watching it. Oh well. As for "Insidious", I honestly didn't care for the film, as it wasn't that scary for me, and as Carl said, I didn't like the shaky camera during the movie at all, as it sort of sucked me out of the movie at times. However, I think it ultimately just boils down to whatever your tastes in films just happen to be.

Sadly, "Insidious" does nothing for me, but that's only my assessment of it. If you liked the movie, then that's all that matters. Anyway, thanks for stopping by though.

@megavitamin

Oh I know Adam has more in repertoire than playing those type of characters, but I was mainly referring to how he always comes off in "romantic comedies" specially. The other films you mentioned aren't exactly romantic comedies (Well maybe with the exception of "Reign Over Me", as I've never seen it). However, "Funny People" was more of a dramatic comedy, and "Punch Drunk Love" had comedic elements in it, but it was more a romantic drama than anything else. Anyway, I do appreciate you taking the time to read my hub, and sharing some of your thoughts with us.

@thehug5

lol. To be honest, I'm not even a hundred percent sure what really was going on in "Sucker Punch" either, as I personally think Snyder was trying way too hard to prove to the audience that he could blur the lines of reality and fantasy to the point, he just forgot to tell any kind of coherent story. That or he was just trying to make the viewer know what it was like to be bat s*** insane. If the latter is true, then he definitely succeeded, as i do think baby doll was crazy if you ask me. However, if you liked the movie then, that's fine. I'm glad to hear you liked it more than i did. personally, it's not my cup of tea, but to each their own. I do appreciate you taking the time to read my hub though.

@paradise7

Yeah, that's true. Although the rest of the film is mediocre, I think "Sucker Punch" is definitely a work of art in terms of it's visuals. Anyway, I appreciate you stopping by to share your thoughts with us paradise, and thanks for your support as always. :)

@alocsin

lol. Well, you're definitely a lucky man then. ;) lol Anyway, thanks for stopping by. :)


Stevennix2001 profile image

Stevennix2001 4 years ago Author

@carl the critic

Wow, that has got to be the most detailed comment that I've ever gotten on this site. lol. First of all, I thank you for sharing your thoughts with us, as I'll try to answer each of your statements one by one.

Season of the witch: Wow, you must really be psychic then. Maybe you should play the lottery sometime, or go to Las Vegas to gamble in a few casinos, to see if you can win some money. With that kind of ability, I'll bet you'll walk out being as rich as Bill Gates probably. lol.

No Strings Attached: Yeah, it is just another stupid romantic comedy. It's a real shame too, as you'd think a movie with Natalie Portman would be at least halfway decent.

Twilight: Agreed

Beastly: Well, I honestly didn't have any preconceived expectations of the film. Sure, I did hear about it for a while, but I just knew it was supposed to be a modern day retelling of "Beauty and the Beast." Unfortunately, the film wasn't that great to begin with, so you didn't miss a thing.

Sucker Punch: Again, I agree with you.

Insidious: Well, I guess it's more of acquired taste when it comes down to it. I can understand how you liked the film, as I thought you presented a lot of great arguments in your review of it. However, the film just didn't do anything for me, as it just didn't seem all that scary to me, nor did I care for much for the story, or cinematography. But then again, that's just my opinion. However, if you liked the film, then I'm glad to hear that one of us did, as the only thing that does matter is if you liked it or not. However, I do appreciate you sharing your thoughts on why you liked the film with us, as I'm sure you're not alone in liking it. However, it just wasn't for me.

Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked- Okay, maybe I didn't make this clear enough earlier, but to be honest, I honestly don't expect much from live action family films, as most of them tend to be mediocre anyway. However, I do expect some effort to be put into it. Sure, the original "Chipmunk Adventure" wasn't a masterpiece, or classic by any means, but you can at least tell the animators were trying to tell a cohesive and quality story given the limitations of the franchise.

In the live action films of the chipmunks, you don't ever feel any kind of effort put into them at all. No, all the live action films do is steal and insert various pop cultural references, while copying tired old plot devices to make up a cohesive story; hence there's no effort put into it.

Granted, it's a kids film, but that's no excuse for not showing a single shed of effort, as the entire live action franchise has failed to do.

smurfs: Well, like i said with beastly, you aren't missing much. lol.

"Jack and Jill" and "Just Go With It": Lol. Well that's a very interesting theory, and you might have a good point there. But, I still like my theory better about how "Jack and Jill" was released primarily to make "Twilight" look good by comparison. lol. Although, you might be spot on about "Just Go With It" though. lol

Anyway, I don't mind if you share your opinions with us here, as I kind of encourage it. Besides, I always like hearing other people's opinions on things. Oh and thanks for telling me about the grammar error that I made in the "Insidious" section, as I'll be sure to change that. Thanks again for stopping by. :)


Cogerson profile image

Cogerson 4 years ago from Virginia

What a good bad list you have....lol. I watched the cameo of Johnny Depp in Jack and Jill...and it was so painful to watch that I had to turn it off....seeing Al Pacino doing comedy is not something I want to see....just that clip proves it is the worst movie of the year. In my Top Films of 2011 hub, Jack and Jill ended up being ranked as the worst film of the year according to critics and audiences...barely beating out another Sandler production Bucky Larson:Born To Be A Star. Thanks for alerting us on 10 movies to avoid.


Beth100 profile image

Beth100 4 years ago from Canada

HMMMM.... I seem to have a GREAT job of avoiding this list with the exception of Sucker Punch. I take your word on the rest because (and you heard me say in your other hub) Sucker Punch really sucked so much that it imploded on itself!

Nice list Steven! xo


Stevennix2001 profile image

Stevennix2001 4 years ago Author

Your welcome, and thank you for reading my hub about this topic. I didn't even know that Sandler had another film outside of the two that I mentioned in this hub. I guess it must've been that bad to really not get noticed. lol. Anyway, thanks again for stopping by buddy. :)


Stevennix2001 profile image

Stevennix2001 4 years ago Author

lol. Yeah, that's true. Anyway, I appreciate you stopping by again, as it's always a pleasure to see you Beth. :) xoxo


glenn wallace profile image

glenn wallace 4 years ago

Props on sitting through all those! I only had the pleasure (?) of watching one of these in the theater, and I kinda wanted to barf.


Stevennix2001 profile image

Stevennix2001 4 years ago Author

lol. I hear ya, as I'm so not looking forward to the next Twilight film. sadly, I know i'll have to review it though if I want to keep my readers happy. lol Anyway, thanks for dropping by Glenn. :)

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working