Summary
- Ebert had no mercy for low-budget horror films, giving scathing reviews to like “The Guardian” and “Halloween III.”
- He criticized the lack of originality and poor production in horror sequels like “Critters 2” and “Resident Evil: Apocalypse.”
- Obscure horror films like “The Devil’s Rain” and “Hellbound: Hellraiser II” fell short of Ebert’s expectations, receiving low ratings.
Famed film critic Roger Ebert knew how to give a film that failed to live up to expectations its just desserts, especially when it came to horror. One of the most famous and beloved movie reviewers of all time, Roger Ebert clearly didn’t have an equal love for all genres, with horror being particularly low on his list of favorites. In particular, he famously disregarded the slasher genre, which he derogatorily referred to as “dead teenager films.” Thus, it’s no surprise that horror movies feature heavily on Ebert’s list of most hated films.
- How to Play the McDonald’s Training Game?
- When is Doctor Who on Disney Plus? Where Can I Watch Doctor Who?
- Profundis Chapter 63 Release Date, Recap, Spoiler, Raw Scan, and More
- White Chicks Cast Where Are They Now? White Chicks Wiki, Cast, Plot and More
- Eddie Murphy Ethnicity, What is Eddie Murphy’s Ethnicity?
Roger Ebert truly offered no quarter to low-budget or poorly-thought-out horror movies, which typically have a zealous fanbase willing to forgive a lot in the name of a good scare. Whether it was a prestige drop from a visionary director like M. Night Shyamalan’s filmography or simply the latest in a long-line of commercially viable franchise films, Ebert could be truly ruthless with his criticism of scary movies. With how well he was able to articulate his thoughts, it’s hard to argue with many of his takes on the following films.
You are watching: Rogert Ebert’s Picks For The 10 Worst Horror Movies Of All Time
10 The Guardian
Ebert’s rating: 1 star
Not to be confused with the 2006 action-adventure drama starring Kevin Costner, The Guardian is a forgotten horror film that made the ranks of Ebert’s worst-ever list. The second horror film by director William Friedkin following the critically-acclaimed possession piece The Exorcist, the movie follows a pair of young parents who hire a mysterious nanny to help with the task of raising their two children. Things quickly go awry when the couple realizes that their new hired help is actually an ancient and vengeful nature spirit.
Roger Ebert criticized the premise of the film, mocking the clear disconnect between the forested precipice the couple’s house sits on and the geography of what is clearly Los Angeles. From there, he praised the technical filmmaking while expressing a distinct tiredness with which he saw The Guardian as an unsightly bump in Friedkin’s uneven filmography. Despite its originality, the tale of a druidic evil wasn’t enough to pique Roger Ebert’s interest.
9 13 Ghosts
Ebert’s rating: 1 star
A rare debut film for a director that is also a remake of an old classic, 13 Ghosts is perhaps the lowest-regarded of beloved actor Matthew Lillard’s close encounters with the spooky and supernatural. Lillard stars as the resident psychic in a crew of ghost hunters who seek to capture evidence of a fearsome ghost said to be prowling the premises of an ancient mansion. It’s not long before the feared Juggernaut spirit is joined by 12 other unique spirits, fulfilling the premise of the film’s haunting title.
Like many other reviewers that contributed to the film’s abysmal Rotten Tomatoes score, Roger Ebert was more than unimpressed by the horror remake. Ebert described the film’s audacious sound design and visual cues as “Literally painful. It hurts the eyes and ears.“, suspecting such choices were made to cover up the knowingly-thin plot and lackluster final editing choices. While he could admit the film had some level of impressive production design and visuals, the screenplay and audio mix were enough to deter him expeditiously.
8 Critters 2: The Main Course
Ebert’s rating: 1 star
A sequel to a thinly-veiled ripoff of the child-friendly Gremlins movies, Critters 2: The Main Course feels like it has no business being reviewed by a critical mind as respected as Roger Ebert’s. Regardless, the film finds itself on Ebert’s shortlist of the worst that horror and science fiction have to offer. Bringing back the titular creatures, Critters 2: The Main Course takes place two years after the events of the first film, revealing a new batch of Critter eggs that soon hatch and wreak havoc on the town of Grover’s Bend.
See more : Michael Pitt Religion What Religion is Michael Pitt? Is Michael Pitt a Christian?
Ebert was never one to give films a break for budgetary constraints, and laid into Critters 2: The Main Course for its hokey special effects. He remarked how “It is quite obvious, in many shots, that the critters […] are lined up along the edges of tables and other flat surfaces so that unseen puppeteers can operate them.”, bemoaning the loss of personality and production value compared to the first movie’s version of the monsters. Even if Ebert could have appreciated Critters, its poorly-conceived spawn deserved nothing but malice.
7 The Devil’s Rain
Ebert’s rating: 1 1/2 stars
A supernatural horror story fueled by religious terror with an ensemble cast, it might be surprising to learn that The Devil’s Rain was so poorly-received by Roger Eberts. Starring big names like William Shatner and John Travolta, the film follows a close-knit family haunted by their connections to a satanic priest. What follows is an all-out war between the Preston family and the demonic cult following the charismatic Jonathan Corbis.
Roger Ebert’s voice was just one part of the choir of universally negative reviews that bombarded The Devil’s Rain upon its release. Specifically, Ebert pointed out the drawn out shots of Western landscapes that padded out the film’s needlessly long feature runtime, something that couldn’t be sustained by the strength of its concept alone. An extra half star may be rewarded for a few elements Ebert praised, such as the costumes and key performances, but overall, the beloved critic rained on The Devil’s Rain‘s parade.
6 Halloween III: Season Of The Witch
Ebert’s rating: 1 and 1/2 stars
By far the most infamous entry in the long-running Halloween franchise, Halloween III: Season of the Witch made the controversial decision to remove Michael Myers altogether, going back to John Carpenter’s original plans for the series to be an anthology with an entirely new story. This might not have drawn the ire of critics and horror fans alike if it wasn’t for the threequel’s absurd premise. The plot of Halloween III: Season of the Witch revolves around an evil plot to control children with magical Halloween masks.
Ebert seemed to almost ironically enjoy the absurdity of Halloween III: Season of the Witch‘s story, balking at the Bond-esque mad scientist lair and countless references to better horror movies. Like other critics, Ebert also pointed out the nonsensical nature of the villain’s plan, the impetus of which never gets a clear answer in the film. Still, the famed reviewer was at least able to award a genuine 1/2 star for Stacy Nelkin’s performance as the horror heroine.
5 The Deathmaster
Ebert’s rating: 1 star
Roger Ebert prefaced his review of The Deathmaster with a brief history lesson regarding the film’s creation. Producer Roger Corman commissioned the film solely to take advantage of actor Robert Quarry’s remaining contracted days, painting an ominous picture of the slapdash horror picture’s ability to creatively succeed. The Deathmaster posits Quarry as a cult leader named Khorda who is secretly a vampire, plotting nefarious schemes for his horde of human followers.
Hilariously, Ebert uses his review to estimate exactly how long Quarry was on the hook for during the production of The Deathmaster, guessing a mere couple of weeks judging by the film’s coverage and final performances. While Ebert praised what Quarry was able to do as a vampire performer, he relentlessly mocked the talent of the supporting cast, whose characters he explained to be particularly unintelligent. Ebert elaborated, “They are so dumb, in fact, that they have had to learn to speak the English language by watching old AIP exploitation movies, and their dialog is eight years out of date.”
4 Resident Evil
Ebert’s rating: 1 star
See more : Is She The Wolf Ott Release Date and Time, Countdown, When Is It Coming Out?
Infamously, Ebert once made controversial former statements that asserted video games can never be art. Thus, it’s no surprise that a horror movie based off a game long before the “video game curse” was broken failed to move him critically. Loosely based off of Capcom’s highly-popular survival horror series, Resident Evil is a futuristic monster movie that follows Milla Jovovich and Michelle Rodriguez’s efforts to take on the insidious Umbrella corporation’s genetic monstrosities.
Ebert was quick to point out how the film never even seems bothered to properly name Jovovich and Rodriguez’s characters, who are credited with varying names in official material. He also didn’t go easy on the dialogue, remarking that “The characters have no small talk. Their dialogue consists of commands, explanations, exclamations and ejaculations.” While he could admire some of the film’s creativity in its creature design, Ebert was ultimately unimpressed by Resident Evil.
3 The Village
Ebert’s rating: 1 star
Considered by many to be the beginning of M. Night Shyamalan’s cinematic downfall, Roger Ebert was one of many voices to disparage The Village. The film takes place in an isolated, rural community in the early 19th century beset by mysterious monsters that emerge from the woods, with all the villagers following strict rules to avoid their ire. The Village is famous for containing one of Shyamalan’s most audacious and disrespectful twist endings ever.
Compared to other low-rated horror films that Ebert seemed to only have a tired disinterest in, the well-respected critic was furious about Shyamalan’s ending to The Village. He punctuated his frustrations by claiming “It’s so witless, in fact, that when we do discover the secret, we want to rewind the film so we don’t know the secret anymore.” Beyond the ending, Ebert was also brought to despair by the lack of emotion in the performances and the dreary tone.
2 Resident Evil: Apocalypse
Ebert’s rating: 1/2 a star
It seems absurd that Roger Ebert would take the time to review not just one, but two films in the gruesome action-shlock mess that is the Resident Evil film franchise. Yet here Resident Evil: Apocalypse stands, scraping the bottom of the barrel of Ebert’s horror and science fiction movie recommendations. This time around, the Umbrella Corporation has unleashed yet another zombie plague on Raccoon City, and the heroes struggle to rescue the daughter of a powerful official that can extract them before the entire metropolitan area is blown to smithereens.
Ebert has little constructive criticism to offer Resident Evil: Apocalypse, calling it “a dead zone, a film without interest, wit, imagination or even entertaining violence and special effects.” His prose regarding the film reads so tired that he even quoted his review of the previous movie, and clearly cared little to dissect the failings of what he viewed as a cynical cash grab. For its sins, Resident Evil: Apocalypse enjoys the lowliest standing of even Ebert’s most hated horror features with only a measly half star.
1 Hellbound: Hellraiser II
Ebert’s rating: 1/2 a star
The Hellraiser franchise isn’t exactly critically acclaimed for its countless sequels, and Roger Ebert’s thoughts on the first of them makes it clear as to why. Hellbound: Hellraiser II picks up mere hours after the original leaves off, with the traumatized Kristy reeling in the hospital from her terrifying encounter with the sadomasochistic Cenobites. It isn’t long before the halls of her hospital become the layers of hell itself, and Kristy finds herself once again helpless in another infernal nightmare.
Ebert was never one to enjoy gore for gore’s sake, and dismisses Hellbound: Hellraiser II as “simply a series of gruesome images that can be watched in any order.” Aside from the overload of disturbing imagery, Ebert also didn’t miss the film’s lazy construction, finding ironic humor in the over-reliance of protagonists Kristy and Tiffany simply shouting each other’s names over and over again while wandering the annals of hell. For the lack of story, Hellbound: Hellraiser II finds itself as the most reviled subject of Ebert’s horror movie reviews.
Source: https://www.phonggdkrongpac.edu.vn
Category: Entertainment