Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

The Worst Films Of 2013... So Far...

Features
by The Playlist Staff
July 10, 2013 1:40 PM
160 Comments
  • |

Is this the worst summer of blockbusters in a recent age or is it the best? Are “Man of Steel" arguments worth losing friendships over? Is "Southland Tales" a masterpiece as posited by generation revisionism or is it the mess critics took it for initially? Will you dare to give your money to villain mensch Adam Sandler over hero Guillermo del Toro? Debate rages on in 2013 over a variety of topics as is par for the course in the opinionated world of movie criticism and discussion. And yes, as we glance down at our watches, we realize it’s basically the midway point of the year. We already looked at what a handful of us thought were the Best Film Of The Year... So Far, and so in the Peter Travers school of thinking, we thought it might be worthwhile to look at the worst films of the year so far on a Wednesday hump day.

While “Best” was examined by a few core Playlist members (despite what you think of the hive mind, consensus is difficult to achieve around the water cooler), we thought we’d approach our Worst So Far list a bit differently and let each writer speak for themselves so you know where they stand (frankly, some of us don’t want to be standing next to Erik when you throw tomatoes at him). And so, that’s the drill: a quick, down and dirty look at what each of us (or those that participated anyhow) feel is the worst movie of the year so far.

White House Down
Okay, before I dive into this, I should qualify that “White House Down” is the worst movie I saw so far this year... the whole way through. “Identity Thief” probably would have beat it to the punch if I was able to make it through the first half, but life is too short for a movie that screechingly awful, and I bailed out before it was over. But back to Roland Emmerich’s latest explosion fest. In my review, I laid out pretty clearly every reason why this movie is dismal entertainment, but even more than the few supporters of “The Lone Ranger,” this movie had a pretty decent bunch of folks behind it giving it a thumbs up, with their justifications mostly amounting to: “But the movie knows it’s dumb, it’s just having fun within the cliches of the action movie! It’s a popcorn movie!” If only. I’ll grant that Emmerich does on occasion acknowledge how asinine the plot of the movie is, and relishes his leads (the thoroughly wasted Channing Tatum and Jamie Foxx doing their best in non-roles) spitting out the cornball dialogue (if James Vanderbilt is getting $3 million for scripts like this, I’ve gotta get an agent). But these brief respites of self-acknowledgement at the silliness of the enterprise are thoroughly drowned out by the rest of the movie which takes every ridiculous development completely seriously. If Emmerich really wanted to take the piss out of his own movie, he wouldn’t have spent as much time as he does on the turgid government-coup-World-War-III plot that is not only mind-numbingly dull but mind-numbingly stupid. As for popcorn entertainment, if having your flavorless, derivative mash of a movie spoon-fed, burped up, and spoon-fed again over two plus hours of tedious runtime, is a cinematic escape for you... Well, you need to see more, and better, movies. “White House Down” is never self-aware enough to be clever, and it’s so cobbled together from parts of nearly three decades worth of action films, that it never feels remotely fresh or interesting. Emmerich may have impressively blown the fuck out of stuff in the past, but he’s never been more anonymous as a filmmaker, here seemingly content to let as many bullets fly as possible hoping volume will equal spectacle (it doesn’t)... As much as “The Lone Ranger” didn’t work, at least there was an attempt at authorship, and some interesting ideas explored and presented even if again, they didn’t quite cohere. In this film, I’m supposed to give it a pass because it passes a ludicrously low quality bar with A-list stars and a big budget? Sorry, not happening. - Kevin Jagernauth

“The Purge”
It was almost a Rorschach test to see how demented and damaged contemporary audiences were when “The Purge” was announced, presenting the hook of a single night where all crime was legal. What’s insidious was that director James DeMonaco knew exactly how to play their audience, dangling the carrot of lowered unemployment and crime rates in a “New” America where the Purge has wiped the slate clean. However, the film begins with upsetting (possibly real?) surveillance footage of people being gunned down, shot in alleys, killed indiscriminately by killers who wielded weapons like toys. The line had never been so perfectly drawn: that could be you, America, and wouldn’t it be awesome? Not a moment in “The Purge” honestly addresses the morality of such a decision (nor does it ever genuinely explain how such an idea is presented by politicians and passed into law), but it does raise the specter of the haves using the night to pursue the have-nots, suggesting unemployment and poverty rates have dropped due to a smaller presence of the unfortunate, chased like dogs by richer people who can afford such ordinance. Such is the plight introduced by the nondescript white preppies who torture the family in “The Purge,” who use the words like “birthright” and “entitlement” to describe their desire to kill a homeless black ex-soldier. “The Purge” is another horror film that pretends to be horrified at the very idea it’s pushing, just as the “Saw” films discussed justice and retribution but simply believed in guiltless bloodletting, but it also does so by pursuing a dubious, ugly racial agenda, one where the homeless black man turns out to be heroic enough to silently do the right thing, but not heroic enough to actually merit a name in the credits, as he walks away having protected the way of life of an upper-crust white family. It’s lip service to nothing but hate and violence, pushing a non-violent agenda in its climax, but not without a few stereo-assaulting head-smashings, and the promise of even more racially-motivated violence to come next year. A radio report at the end of the film reports that it was “the most successful Purge yet,” and the film is just stupid enough that there are zero clues in the text to actually describe what the hell that means, or who it incriminates. - Gabe Toro

Violet & Daisy
While I must admit Chan-Wook Park’s cartoonish and tonally misguided “Stoker” still lays close to my heart as one of the worst films of the year, I believe I’ve given it enough of a paddling. And so I fully admit the impetus for this list was my mildly appalled reaction to “Violet & Daisy,” a fairy-tale like hitman film from Geoffrey Fletcher, the Oscar-winning writer behind “Precious.” Screenwriters making their feature-length directorial debuts has been an ugly road in recent years (we recently look at this phenomenon in this feature). Dustin Lance Black and “Virginia,” Mitch Glazer and the stunningly ill-conceived “Passion Play,” and William Monaghan’s “London Boulevard” all suggest that none of these guys should quit their day jobs and the same can be said for Fletcher’s debut, “Violet & Daisy.” Like a painful and dated version of “Pulp Fiction” meets “Betty & Veronica” Archie Comics, Alexis Bledel and Saoirse Ronan star as teenage assassins who crack wise, snap bubblegum and casually eliminate their targets with cocksure irreverence. Now “Violet & Daisy” wants to be Quentin Tarantino with high school girls, 20 years after that fact, which already is as wretched as it sounds, but then the plot gets even stranger. The girls are essentially going to quit the hitman life, but then their favorite pop idol Barbie Sunday’s (played by Cody Horn in photographs on the cover of Teen Beat-like magazines) show is canceled, they decide to do one more hit to raise money to keep her on the air. Their last target (James Gandolfini, in a role that’s sadly beneath him) and his existential willingness to die complicates their job and the girls soon find themselves on path of self-examination that crosses with killers, guns and each others. A would-be crime fable, “Violet & Daisy” is an utterly uninvolving mess. So much so that it’s shocking to think Fletcher is an Academy Award winner. “What is he thinking?!” crosses your mind every few minutes of this ridiculous fiasco and it’ll be a wonder if he ever has an opportunity to direct again. This is the worst completely misguided indie film since "Hick." - Rodrigo Perez

After Earth
There is nothing worse than a 13-year-old boy (except maybe a 13-year-old girl, coming from someone who once was one). Placing an unsympathetic adolescent at the center of your big-budget sci-fi film is a cinematic crime roughly on level only with casting the largely untalented Jaden Smith as that 13-year-old. But it isn’t the younger Smith who deserves much of the blame for M. Night Shyamalan’s “After Earth.” As the icy (and enigmatic!) General Cyper Raige, his father Will somehow manages to be less charming than his son, which is a feat in itself for the usually magnetic actor. The elder Smith is also responsible for the film’s story, which follows the young Kitai Raige as he tries to save himself and his injured father after their spaceship crashes on a futuristic, deadly version of Earth. Smith gets extra demerits if he also came up with the characters’ names, which sound like something out of particularly bad fanfic. There should at least be some nerd joy derived from the technology when you set a film this far into the future, but I was too busy puzzling over the universe’s biggest plot holes and required leaps of logic to get excited over the Raige family’s fancy knives. I may have gone to a high school that taught Creationism as a science class, but even I could recognize that the earth’s evolution was a bit fast– and impossible. “After Earth” tells its unlucky audience that the planet evolved to kill humans with plane-sized eagles and giant baboons, but we’ve been gone for a millennium. How would that specialization happen in our absence? There are more issues, but I wouldn’t want to put more thought into dissecting the film than Shyamalan and Gary Witta put into writing it. - Kimber Myers

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    

160 Comments

  • Anna | January 12, 2014 12:49 PMReply

    To the Wonder is the worst movie ever. Whispering in French does not make a cult movie. I completely agree with Indiewire! :)

  • Anna | January 12, 2014 12:49 PMReply

    To the Wonder is the worst movie ever. Whispering in French does not make a cult movie. I completely agree with Indiewire! :)

  • Donna | September 11, 2013 12:29 PMReply

    Talk about bad movies how about The last exorcism part 2.Yuck.

  • Anonymous | August 20, 2013 3:35 PMReply

    The Host is one of the worst movies ever made.

  • Benedict | July 31, 2013 10:02 AMReply

    This article was pretty on-point until it started BS-ing about To The Wonder or The Place Beyond The Pines. From a Malick non-fan point of view I'd understand not enjoying To The Wonder, but Pines was one of the better dramas of the year so far. Suck it, Indiewire.

  • JESUSFUCKINGCHRISTMOTHERFUCKER. | July 25, 2013 6:43 AMReply

    the incredible burt wonderstone cost 30 million dollars to create? what a waist of money....

    and what do they spend the money on exactly wigs and costumes, get serious people movies are so expensive now of course there gonna fucking flop when you spend a fucking fortune making complete garbage... and nobody will want to see your movie i hate to break it to you FUCKHEADS!

    frankly the movie industry is just embarrassing, people you are better off watching tv which is now the forerunner of emotional drama...

    shows like game of thrones and sherlock are making movies look amateurish at best, i seriously don't understand why they just throw millions of dollars down the toilet

    movie script writers should hang there heads in shame because dialogue in movies is a huge part of the issue.

  • JESUSFUCKINGCHRISTMOTHERFUCKER. | July 25, 2013 6:36 AMReply

    movie industry is a complete joke, to many people are easily pleased by the moronic crap they churn out.

    why should people pay to see utter bollocks, films will continue to flop until they step up there game script writers and CGI overkill are killing the industry

  • smarterthanyou001 | July 25, 2013 6:29 AMReply

    Seriously how the hell do they greenlight a movie named "the incredible Burt Wonderstone" i mean really ?? are you fucking serious????

    who in there right mind would pay money to see that ? i haven't even seen the movie but i think the title is MORE then enough to put me off it for good.

    and evil dead was fucking awful, yeah violent and abit grimey but the story was fucking awful the characters where awful the whole " drugs intervention plot" was weak.

    SPOILER, and then the sister gets possessed and shes evil for the majority of the movie. But then all of a sudden her brother dies just like that and she is good and the movie ends, im sorry but why do movies nowdays have to include such weak actresses and female character's

    that was one of the main things that ruined the 2012 THING reboot, weak pointless female character's totally unbelievable... fucking pisses me off, whats wrong with casting strong male actors.

  • Fred | July 23, 2013 5:00 PMReply

    We all know that sensitivity-among-snark is one of the defining traits around here if only for the amount of reviews and retrospectives that are ground to a halt to catalog offending elements (70s cop movies are homophobic! The horror genre can be misogynistic! 97,331 comedies and animated fetures have troubling racial stereotypes!) So it's a bit puzzling to see this particular piece filled with rimshot jabs at the year's worst by way of comparisons to the mentally infirm.

  • Sherri | July 21, 2013 2:18 AMReply

    Last ones...Pain and Gain and Hangover 3... UGH! They were both terrible, tone deaf, overlong, unfunny, cynical wastes of time and energy. I wanted to walk out of both but I was with friends.

    Pain and Gain had a great cast who did their jobs but Michael Bay just can't help making good actors and a good premise into an appallingly bad movie.

  • Sherri | July 21, 2013 2:07 AMReply

    Oh yeah and A Good Day to Die Hard was pretty damn awful too! THAT was better than Stoker, A Place Beyond the Pines and Evil Dead?

    This is the worst list I've read in 2013...so far

  • Sherri | July 21, 2013 2:02 AMReply

    Half of these I haven't seen but A Place Beyond the Pines, Stoker and Evil Dead were pretty damn good. They weren't perfect but they all tried to show you some standard stories in new and creative ways. They were all very well acted and although Stoker and A Place... had pacing problems, they were incredibly engrossing.

    And Evil Dead was a blast I have NO idea what they're talking about here! Its gross and funny and just about what I expected and wanted from an Evil Dead remake.

    I don't usually call other people's opinions stupid but I have to say this list is awful. I agree with someone posting below that Temptation (that Tyler Perry abomination) was literally the worst movie I've seen in LONG while and how that didn't make this list and other good movies took its place completely invalidates how well thought out this list was.

  • HulaGarden | July 20, 2013 2:40 PMReply

    Alert! We've got a Malick hater on the loose in the editorial staff! There's one in every bunch.

  • Alex | July 19, 2013 1:37 PMReply

    How to To the Wonder and Evil Dead made it onto this list when Tyler Perry's Temptation, one of the most offensive and downright terrible movies I've ever seen, did not is beyond me. I loved To the Wonder and Evil Dead, and I'll respect that you all didn't, but solely on the basis of Temptation's treatment of women, that movie deserves to be there instead of either of those two.

  • yod | July 18, 2013 11:03 PMReply

    It seems some of the contributors mistook the premise of this article. It is titled "worst films of 2013" but perhaps it should have been titled "most disappointing films of 2013" because that's the only list Place Beyond the Pines even deserves consideration. It is so far from the worst film it's not funny.

  • ana | July 17, 2013 10:16 PMReply

    you forgot to mention "Man of Steel" or that movie "the host". idk I enjoyed watching The Incredible Burt Wonderstone and Hansel & Gretel

  • anna | July 17, 2013 7:26 PMReply

    i understand that you didn't like at all but how can you claim that the place beyonf the pines is the WORST movie of 2013 so far ?
    you are stupid..very ugly ..and you are definetely a big piece of shit with a small dick

  • anna | July 17, 2013 7:27 PM

    and that's you i am talking about bell you shithead

  • joe | July 16, 2013 8:25 PMReply

    that's that chris bell you are the human sheet

  • Pj Goodman | July 16, 2013 5:49 PMReply

    I think that INCREDIBLE WONDRSTONE is one bests, and Superman. Mn f Steel is an ugly shit. Just that.

  • roy | July 15, 2013 3:34 PMReply

    bell you are an ugly piece of shit

  • chris | July 14, 2013 11:39 AMReply

    Apparently, everyone thinks they can reply to an article... 15 times! Ha!

  • cole | July 13, 2013 12:13 PMReply

    where is The Host???

  • Pj Goodman | July 16, 2013 5:51 PM

    Well, you´re best. The Host is a Motherfucker Idiot creation (like Twilight). You´re fuckin awesome, Cole!

  • Todd | July 13, 2013 6:41 AMReply

    How about responding to the question at hand. What is the worst movie of the year? If your the Friday night cattle that marketing departments tell what to see and do. Than you should have named a big budget film like: A good Day to Die Hard $67,349,198 on a budget of 92 Million, Anything Tylor Perry Like Tyler Perry presents Peeples $9,123,834 Gross on a budget of $15 Million, Parker $17,616,641 Gross on a budget of $35 Million a shame because I usually like his films, Pain & Gain what a piece of crap! Grossed less than 50 million coming off the heels of Ted which grossed $218,815,487 on a budget of less than Pain & Gains entire take. Pitch that satistic in your next pitch meeting Marky Mark. Even worse films were: This is the End, The unincredible Burt Wonderstone and how about The Intern. Why do they keep casting these guys when their films loose money again and again? Last but not least, Arnolds The Last Stand $12,050,299 on a $45 Million Budget. Kinda like our California buget, in the red! All very bad films and money loosers, not to mention career enders for a lot of people. So if you named Superman or Star Trek 2 than you just don't watch enough movies. But, if you watch the smaller budgeted films which are desperate for screen counts, how about Lay the Favorite $20,998 Gross, That's thousands not millions, opened on only 61 screens nation wide even though it had Bruce Willis in it and wtf was he doing in that? But the worst film of the year so far is "Storage 24" Grossed $72 actual Dollars. Everybody thinks they can make a movie... Ha!

  • Todd | July 13, 2013 6:15 AMReply

    How about responding to the question at hand. What is the worst movie of the year? If your the Friday night cattle that marketing departments tell what to see and do. Than you should have named a big budget film like: A good Day to Die Hard $67,349,198 on a budget of 92 Million, Anything Tylor Perry Like Tyler Perry presents Peeples $9,123,834 Gross on a budget of $15 Million, Parker $17,616,641 Gross on a budget of $35 Million a shame because I usually like his films, Pain & Gain what a piece of crap! Grossed less than 50 million coming off the heels of Ted which grossed $218,815,487 on a budget of less than Pain & Gains entire take. Pitch that satistic in your next pitch meeting Marky Mark. Even worse films were: This is the End, The unincredible Burt Wonderstone and how about The Intern. Why do they keep casting these guys when their films loose money again and again? Last but not least, Arnolds The Last Stand $12,050,299 on a $45 Million Budget. Kinda like our California buget, in the red! All very bad films and money loosers, not to mention career enders for a lot of people. So if you named Superman or Star Trek 2 than you just don't watch enough movies. But, if you watch the smaller budgeted films which are desperate for screen counts, how about Lay the Favorite $20,998 Gross, That's thousands not millions, opened on only 61 screens nation wide even though it had Bruce Willis in it and wtf was he doing in that? But the worst film of the year so far is "Storage 24" Grossed $72 actual Dollars. Everybody thinks they can make a movie... Ha!

  • Todd | July 13, 2013 6:15 AMReply

    How about responding to the question at hand. What is the worst movie of the year? If your the Friday night cattle that marketing departments tell what to see and do. Than you should have named a big budget film like: A good Day to Die Hard $67,349,198 on a budget of 92 Million, Anything Tylor Perry Like Tyler Perry presents Peeples $9,123,834 Gross on a budget of $15 Million, Parker $17,616,641 Gross on a budget of $35 Million a shame because I usually like his films, Pain & Gain what a piece of crap! Grossed less than 50 million coming off the heels of Ted which grossed $218,815,487 on a budget of less than Pain & Gains entire take. Pitch that satistic in your next pitch meeting Marky Mark. Even worse films were: This is the End, The unincredible Burt Wonderstone and how about The Intern. Why do they keep casting these guys when their films loose money again and again? Last but not least, Arnolds The Last Stand $12,050,299 on a $45 Million Budget. Kinda like our California buget, in the red! All very bad films and money loosers, not to mention career enders for a lot of people. So if you named Superman or Star Trek 2 than you just don't watch enough movies. But, if you watch the smaller budgeted films which are desperate for screen counts, how about Lay the Favorite $20,998 Gross, That's thousands not millions, opened on only 61 screens nation wide even though it had Bruce Willis in it and wtf was he doing in that? But the worst film of the year so far is "Storage 24" Grossed $72 actual Dollars. Everybody thinks they can make a movie... Ha!

  • Todd | July 13, 2013 6:14 AMReply

    How about responding to the question at hand. What is the worst movie of the year? If your the Friday night cattle that marketing departments tell what to see and do. Than you should have named a big budget film like: A good Day to Die Hard $67,349,198 on a budget of 92 Million, Anything Tylor Perry Like Tyler Perry presents Peeples $9,123,834 Gross on a budget of $15 Million, Parker $17,616,641 Gross on a budget of $35 Million a shame because I usually like his films, Pain & Gain what a piece of crap! Grossed less than 50 million coming off the heels of Ted which grossed $218,815,487 on a budget of less than Pain & Gains entire take. Pitch that satistic in your next pitch meeting Marky Mark. Even worse films were: This is the End, The unincredible Burt Wonderstone and how about The Intern. Why do they keep casting these guys when their films loose money again and again? Last but not least, Arnolds The Last Stand $12,050,299 on a $45 Million Budget. Kinda like our California buget, in the red! All very bad films and money loosers, not to mention career enders for a lot of people. So if you named Superman or Star Trek 2 than you just don't watch enough movies. But, if you watch the smaller budgeted films which are desperate for screen counts, how about Lay the Favorite $20,998 Gross, That's thousands not millions, opened on only 61 screens nation wide even though it had Bruce Willis in it and wtf was he doing in that? But the worst film of the year so far is "Storage 24" Grossed $72 actual Dollars. Everybody thinks they can make a movie... Ha!

  • Todd | July 13, 2013 6:14 AMReply

    How about responding to the question at hand. What is the worst movie of the year? If your the Friday night cattle that marketing departments tell what to see and do. Than you should have named a big budget film like: A good Day to Die Hard $67,349,198 on a budget of 92 Million, Anything Tylor Perry Like Tyler Perry presents Peeples $9,123,834 Gross on a budget of $15 Million, Parker $17,616,641 Gross on a budget of $35 Million a shame because I usually like his films, Pain & Gain what a piece of crap! Grossed less than 50 million coming off the heels of Ted which grossed $218,815,487 on a budget of less than Pain & Gains entire take. Pitch that satistic in your next pitch meeting Marky Mark. Even worse films were: This is the End, The unincredible Burt Wonderstone and how about The Intern. Why do they keep casting these guys when their films loose money again and again? Last but not least, Arnolds The Last Stand $12,050,299 on a $45 Million Budget. Kinda like our California buget, in the red! All very bad films and money loosers, not to mention career enders for a lot of people. So if you named Superman or Star Trek 2 than you just don't watch enough movies. But, if you watch the smaller budgeted films which are desperate for screen counts, how about Lay the Favorite $20,998 Gross, That's thousands not millions, opened on only 61 screens nation wide even though it had Bruce Willis in it and wtf was he doing in that? But the worst film of the year so far is "Storage 24" Grossed $72 actual Dollars. Everybody thinks they can make a movie... Ha!

  • Todd | July 13, 2013 6:13 AMReply

    How about responding to the question at hand. What is the worst movie of the year? If your the Friday night cattle that marketing departments tell what to see and do. Than you should have named a big budget film like: A good Day to Die Hard $67,349,198 on a budget of 92 Million, Anything Tylor Perry Like Tyler Perry presents Peeples $9,123,834 Gross on a budget of $15 Million, Parker $17,616,641 Gross on a budget of $35 Million a shame because I usually like his films, Pain & Gain what a piece of crap! Grossed less than 50 million coming off the heels of Ted which grossed $218,815,487 on a budget of less than Pain & Gains entire take. Pitch that satistic in your next pitch meeting Marky Mark. Even worse films were: This is the End, The unincredible Burt Wonderstone and how about The Intern. Why do they keep casting these guys when their films loose money again and again? Last but not least, Arnolds The Last Stand $12,050,299 on a $45 Million Budget. Kinda like our California buget, in the red! All very bad films and money loosers, not to mention career enders for a lot of people. So if you named Superman or Star Trek 2 than you just don't watch enough movies. But, if you watch the smaller budgeted films which are desperate for screen counts, how about Lay the Favorite $20,998 Gross, That's thousands not millions, opened on only 61 screens nation wide even though it had Bruce Willis in it and wtf was he doing in that? But the worst film of the year so far is "Storage 24" Grossed $72 actual Dollars. Everybody thinks they can make a movie... Ha!

  • nightgoat72 | July 12, 2013 10:20 PMReply

    Starting this list with the awesome White House Down instantly discredits it.

  • nightgoat72 | July 18, 2013 12:27 AM

    Totally agreed. Man of Steel is the worst 2013 movie I've seen so far, for sure.

  • Mark | July 15, 2013 3:05 PM

    Agreed. Saw it pretty close to the time I saw Man of Steel. I would watch it again. Man of Steel? Not so much. Man Of Steel has to be the worst movie of the year so far. What was Nolan thinking?

  • dan | July 12, 2013 2:10 PMReply

    Place Beyond the Pines among the worst of the year? Ummmmm no. Clearly you haven't seen enough bad films this year and your diss of Stoker is so so so incorrect!!

  • NewYorker | July 12, 2013 2:07 PMReply

    for me the 10 worst movies of 2013 so far are
    1-After Earth
    2-the Last Exorcism part 2
    3-The Haunting In Connecticut 2: Ghosts Of Georgia
    4-Emperor
    5-The Host(heck i liked the twilight movies better)
    6-The Lone Ranger
    7-The Lords Of Salem
    8-Phantom
    9-The East
    10-Admission

  • kitcon | July 12, 2013 1:57 PMReply

    I though White House Down had some of the most irritating dialogue / scenes I've had to sit through all year so it could be a finalist for "Worst" on my list. To The Wonder makes it unlikely that I will ever eagerly anticipate another late-period Malick film. Place Beyond the Pines was a disappointment but not sure it would be a "worst". I would put Jack the Giant Slayer as far worse than Hansel & Gretel w/c I thought was tongue-in-cheek fun.

  • todd | July 13, 2013 4:22 AM

    You're so right!

  • todd | July 13, 2013 4:22 AM

    You're so right!

  • todd | July 13, 2013 4:22 AM

    You're so right!

  • Hilary | July 12, 2013 10:15 AMReply

    The Big Wedding may rank as the single worst movie I've ever seen, and I've seen some doozies.

  • Todd | July 13, 2013 4:22 AM

    I agree.

  • you hurt goslings feelings | July 12, 2013 8:37 AMReply

    Thanks for farting on some pretty average movies that are probably being considered important films of 2013

  • THEFUTUREMRGITTES | July 12, 2013 8:00 AMReply

    Completely agree on To the Wonder and Malick's filmography in general.

  • ia | July 11, 2013 11:26 PMReply

    In a few years' time, people will look back (if they even remember to) at The Place Beyond the Pines and realize what a generic, cliched, overwrought, try-hard, pretentious mess it was. You are right on with this list.

  • MishuPishu | July 11, 2013 11:21 PMReply

    The WORST thing about this article of the worst movies so far is the idea that a movie that is considered the worst still has value. How is that even possible? Calling something the worst means that it has no value whatsoever and that the two hours (or three to four hours if your talking about Malick) spent watching such horribleness was a total waste of time.

  • MishuPishu | July 11, 2013 11:50 PM

    Okay, we all get it. We want our auteurs to keep making good movies but sometimes they reach this point in their career when they just go over the edge for whatever reason and lose it and it's so obvious and painful. I can see it happening with Malick. I loved the visual beauty and heart of Tree Of Life when I watched it but over a year later, I can't seem to really care that much about it. It was pretty dull, after all, and doesn't linger.

    Truly great movies stay with us forever but truly bad movies stain us forever. So if you start your argument by saying that terrible movies can still have value, I'm curious by what you mean exactly?

  • logan | July 11, 2013 8:28 PMReply

    Evil Dead was fucking perfect. In every way.

    Every other movie though is spot on.

  • Adam Scott Thompson | July 12, 2013 2:59 PM

    Not no but hell no.

  • Cory Everett | July 12, 2013 8:13 AM

    No.

  • kate | July 11, 2013 8:20 PMReply

    spring breakers? cmon

  • Joe B | July 11, 2013 7:37 PMReply

    YOU DISLIKED A MOVIE I LIKE AND I CAME DOWN HERE TO TELL YOU YOU'RE WRONG!!

    But seriously, good writing, and you nailed exactly why "Place Beyond the Pines" was my least favorite movie experience of the year, starting with that gratuitous opening shot. Tracking shots do not automatically equal epic cinema.

  • Owen | July 11, 2013 6:46 PMReply

    Movie 43?

  • jst | July 11, 2013 2:45 PMReply

    Gangster Squad was laughably horrid. Why would anyone hire Emma Stone as a femme fatale ? Ha - Ha - Ha !

  • todd | July 13, 2013 6:41 AM

    I disagree. How many movies have you seen?

  • todd | July 13, 2013 6:41 AM

    I disagree. How many movies have you seen?

  • todd | July 13, 2013 4:25 AM

    I disagree. How many movies have you seen?

  • Jamie | July 11, 2013 1:22 PMReply

    'Stoker' was "cartoonish and tonally misguided"?! That sentence robbed this article of any and all credibility.

  • Francis | July 11, 2013 6:16 PM

    Actually, i disagree. That's spot on, so the article totally has credibility and you never had any to begin with.

  • Sagi | July 11, 2013 12:36 PMReply

    You are just trying to get buzz to your list so you put some amazing movies in your list....LAME.

  • Diana | July 11, 2013 12:15 PMReply

    Seriously? The Place Beyond The Pines? Okay, maybe Bradley Cooper was not the best person to play the cop turned politician but the rest of the cast was spot on. Gangster squad was pretty terrible. Man of Steel should have made the list as well.

  • jdog | July 11, 2013 10:58 AMReply

    Apart from the failed blockbusters on the list, The Playlist staff have assembled a list of films with pretty solid artistic merit with respectable actors and filmmakers associated. It's totally understandable to be disappointed with a movie. Passionately disappointed. But can you really, REALLY call The Place Beyond The Pines, I'm So Excited and To the Wonder (I totally get your line about pretty visuals and that's about it) some of the worst movies of the year or are you just being haters? I understand being let down by flicks that had the potential to be good -- and I think a bunch of these did -- but were you really that offended by Malick and Almodovar's misguided visions of grandeur (I won't clump Cianfrance in there, cause I loved that movie) to the point that they should take the place of a shlockier flick in your article and be pooped on in a snarky tone? Or is it 'cause Fast and the Furious 15 is too obvious and keeping the article interesting and diverse means throwing in a few arthouse flick mentions along the way? With all the soul-less cash-grabs and DOAs out there, I'm sure something could've taken To the Wonder's place. Whether you liked that movie or not, it doesn't deserve the same kind of mean spirited critique reserved for movies called Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters. I'm not defending the indie flicks to be the defendor (see what I did there?) of all things pretentious but just to say that even a failed attempt at original and artful story telling makes these flicks too strong to be on the list.

    Happy Holidays.

  • Tom | July 11, 2013 8:22 AMReply

    I only agree with a few movies on this list. You have a really bad taste in movies

  • Ben | July 11, 2013 6:04 AMReply

    I have to agree on "Gangster Squad" but I enjoyed "Evil Dead" though. "Man of Steel" was terrible, it's possibly the worst movie I've seen this year. "The Wolverine" looks promising as well...

  • Mst3kfan | July 11, 2013 12:39 AMReply

    No mentioning of InAPPropriate Comedy? Or Movie 43, the movie that many critics said could be a contender for one of the worst movies of all time? Come on, guys...

  • Om | July 10, 2013 9:41 PMReply

    Thumbs down to this list. i agree with only 3-4 picks in this list. 'the place beyond the pines' and 'evil dead' don't belong here. and there are far worse movies than 'the incredible burt wonderstone'.

  • hank | July 10, 2013 9:03 PMReply

    take a walk. playlist.

  • David | July 10, 2013 8:46 PMReply

    I know it's all opinion but man, some of the films listed here are baffling. That includes 'Place Beyond the Pine'. I love this site. I really do. But man, it can get extreme here.

  • Rodrigo -Playlist Ed | July 11, 2013 12:42 PM

    David, I don't agree with To The Wonder or Place Beyond The Pines either. I like them both. Is it a bit head-scratching? Yes. But it's an interesting experiment to let everyone have their say and let the chips fall where they may. Let it be said, no one is trying to be "extreme." No one is trying to be anything. I personally really disliked Stoker and a lot of people think I'm crazy for that, but I'm not "trying" to do anything when I reviewed it other than to articulate my dislike for it.

  • MDL | July 10, 2013 8:43 PMReply

    Christopher Bell admits further down that he hasn't seen other films that most would call the 'worst' of the year. So that means we should all chill a bit. Therefore, if one hasn't seen After Earth, Hangover III, Scary Movie 5, Safe Haven, A Good Day to Die Hard or Hansel and Gretel [to name but a few] then one cannot put them on a list of worst films. So instead what gets chosen is the 'worst' of the 'best'. Might be nice if they stated that up front. But it makes for an active comments section.

  • Alan B | July 13, 2013 8:53 AM

    I think there are definite boundaries that should never be crossed when commenting (gender, race, sexuality, other personal aspects), but when you are complaint equates to "oh no, some people don't like the fact that a critic - that doesn't watch many movies - disliked a film I liked" then you probably don't need a laptop, but a cross. The writing on this site is generally snarky, petulant and aggressively anti-intellectual, so I am actually kinda stunned that the writers are shocked - SHOCKED - that the comments would reflect a certain disdain for their writing. Unless you have something generally interesting to contribute, maybe you should think twice before another childish, snarky reply to a comment.

  • Christopher Bell | July 13, 2013 6:37 AM

    Holy shit. I have a halo.

  • Katie Walsh | July 12, 2013 4:10 AM

    @Francis: It's really disappointing! There are some good apples but they are few and far between.

  • Francis | July 11, 2013 6:18 PM

    Katie, it's clear from these comments, that most readers of this site are INCREDIBLY stupid and kneejerk. This is why I barely comment. The discourse is terrible because of many of these yahoos.

  • Katie Walsh | July 11, 2013 1:51 PM

    YOU GUYS. HE DIDN'T MAKE THE LIST. WE EACH GOT ONE TO WRITE ABOUT. READ.

  • Jamie | July 11, 2013 1:29 PM

    Your point that Bell hasn't seen those (legitimately bad) movies is important, but not in justifying the list he did create. The word "worst" inherently implies comparison to all movies released in 2013, not just the ones Bell has seen. If that was not the case, the article should have been called "The Worst Movies of 2013 that Christopher Bell Has Seen". Plus his reply comment doesn't help to polish his halo.

  • Christopher Bell | July 11, 2013 1:53 AM

    Thanks. Since I'm not an active critic anymore, I haven't seen those... but to be perfectly honest, none of that stuff is my bag and if I was still a full-time team member I probably wouldn't have seen them anyway. I still don't like Pines and I still think saying so isn't such a tragic thing.

  • oogle monster | July 10, 2013 8:02 PMReply

    Curious to know what C. Bell thought of Blue Valentine. I don't agree that TPBTP is anywhere near the worst film of the year but it's no where near as great as Blue Valentine. After Gosling leaves the show, the picture goes down the drain. I know TP was really big on Blue Valentine (I think you guys gave it an A+) but curious to know if Bell likes any of Cianfrance's (rather small) output.

  • Christopher Bell | July 11, 2013 1:50 AM

    Hey bud, I actually really liked Blue Valentine. Thought it was pretty devastating. Pines, especially by comparison, felt incredibly forced.

  • Fat Amy | July 10, 2013 6:53 PMReply

    For such a long, and condescending article, one would think you'd pay more attention to editing. Yet, this text is so riddled with typos, it made me want to put it in the list of the Worst Articles Ever Published on IndieWire.

  • MemoriesWriter | July 10, 2013 6:44 PMReply

    I love IndieWire, even if I don't always agree with them on such things. Not that I would consider any of this movies really good, but The Place Beyond the Pines, The Great Gatsby, Stoker & To The Wonder can't be on that list. I mean with so many shitty movies out there, surely there's something else you can think of. Mostly, that's four highly anticipated movies by arguably good directors that get criticized too much because of the hype created before they came out.

  • Mark | July 10, 2013 6:42 PMReply

    Star Trek Into Darkness. Complete and utter garbage, soulless, vapid, corporate-whoring commercialism at its worst. Idiotically written by Kurtzman and 9/11 truther Orci, with not an ounce of wit, style or any semblance of memorable dialogue. The wholesale lifting of the villain and ending of Wrath of Khan was kind of beyond belief, especially as Abrams and co spent two years vehemently denying they would do that. And the final insult to injury was Kirk's magical return from death.

    Abhorrent garbage. Abrams, Kurtzman and Orci should stick to TV junk like Xena and Alias. Unfotunately Abrams will now fuck up Star Wars beyond belief too.

    Jesus. I wonder what Nicholas Meyer, an intelligent, literate man if ever there was one, made of it all?

  • David | July 10, 2013 8:43 PM

    While I understand your anger, but I actually think a restrained JJ will make Star Wars 7 work.

  • David | July 10, 2013 8:42 PM

    While I understand your anger, but I actually think a restrained JJ will make Star Wars 7 work.

Email Updates