I’m pretty sure I saw that one, but it must have been before I started writing short movie reviews, and I don’t remember if I liked it or not. 
It’s a terrible movie but I found it completely hilarious so the 7.0 is not so much a statement of quality but of how much fun I had with it
Yeesh, out of all those listed, I only remember seeing “Battlefield Earth” and “The Chronicles Of Riddick”. BE kinda stunk, TCOR was pretty good ('though “Pitch Black” was way better).
To me, John Carter is just Lt Biddle from “Barnaby Jones”… never saw the movie.
No idea about “47 Ronin” but regular “Ronin” (just 1, I guess) was really good. You’d think 47 of them would be better than 1, but…
I’m assuming this isn’t just about bad movies in general, but flopbusters? Yeah, I wouldn’t punish myself with the likes of “Snow White” or any D’hisni offering. Too many of today’s offal, umm, offerings are just devoid of plot or innovation, and are usually just cheap remakes, knock-offs, “reboots”, or “reimaginings”. And any mention of The Modern Audience™ and you know it’s gonna be shiite.
Someone mentioned “Waterworld”, and I pretty much hated it. Instead of “The Road Warrior” I guess they were aiming for “The Ocean Warrior” or something. Gotta say, the scene of Costner pissing into the distiller then drinking the water was just skeevy. Yeah, that’s one way to get purified water, but to show it was totally unnecessary and just set the mood for the rest of the movie. Like, all that seawater was Right There, y’know??
“B:EvS”, if I’m remembering it right, was so cryptic and filled with plot twists and turns that people have nfi what it was about and couldn’t follow it.
Me, I loved some horrendously bad films like “Plan 9…”, “The Room”, and so on. Hell, even at home I’ll yell “Fat Brittney!” every time Lisa comes on screen… 
(Would love to go to a midnight showing of it…)
Pretty much anything from Tommy Wiseau and Neil Breen are magnificent!
Okay, Wiseau is pretty inept, as his initial vision of TR was that he’d be a vampyre who’d get around the city in a flying car(!!), and had to “scale back” because of budgetary reasons.
Neil Breen is a genuine bona fide genius. You have to be, to make movies that deliberately bad.
Know the saying that it’s harder for an idiot to pretend that he’s smart, than for someone smart to pretend to be an idiot? Yeah, that!
You can see the deliberate “leaks” in his movies that show that cinematic genius. Eg, the cat figurines in “Twisted Pair”!! Perfection! The masking-tape-and-sharpie moustache the guy had? Being “chained” by a paperclip-chain? 
Alas, he does all that on a shoestring budget, and it shows.
Aww, man, now I gotta go and rewatch 'em…
A lot of my favorite movies, even those I can practically recite the dialogue, on their 49th rewatch you can still pick up little details you never noticed before.
And not necessarily Easter Eggs, but actual right-out-in-the-open scenes that only later dawn on you that, “Aaaah! That connects [this] with [that]!!”.
Oh, and didn’t you get the memo? “The Force Is Female!”
So yeah, D’hisni changed pretty much everything so that DSW isn’t even connected to SW except in name only. Same with Dr Who.
Long-established lore is being written out of existence.
I’ve seen surprisingly few of these, but I sometimes like to look for movies that are so bad they’re good. I also sometimes have a very different view of a movie than most people and may really like something unpopular, or vice versus. J.J. Abrams in particular excels at making content that most people seem to like, but I find terrible.
Might as well compare my scores to yours on the handful where our watching overlaps. Looks like no big disagreements here:
I need to make time to watch K-19: The Widowmaker. Cold War submarine intrigues are one of my historical interests, and I really enjoyed reading not only The Hunt for Red October, but also Blind Man’s Bluff. A few scenes I have seen looked solid, and I had heard a few recommendations for it. I didn’t expect to see it on the list.
I had completely missed there was reboot of The Mummy, and I can only ask “why?” The original handled itself well enough, but the sequels and spinoffs fully played out the appeal of the franchise. Stick a fork in it. It’s done. Reading the background on the reboot only deepens how mystified I am.
I want to bring up a film that only lost a little bit of money, and therefore doesn’t come close to making this list: Children of Men. I rate it at least 8.5, if not 9.0, and this is not one of the instances where I like a movie far more than the average viewer. It was widely acclaimed, with very solid ratings from critics and the masses alike. While there were some who gave it poor reviews, I think that’s the norm for any movie that is deeply dystopian, gritty, or uses challenging or unconventional cinematic styles. The majority clearly really liked it. It was more highly rated than, for example, The Matrix, which was a runaway box office success.
And yet somehow, it flopped, despite costing in total less than most of that list of biggest box office bombs cost in net loss alone. I guess perhaps most viewers liked it, but thought it was the sort of movie their friends wouldn’t get, so they didn’t recommend it?
Maybe not the Biggest Financial Bomb, because it cost next to nothing to make it, “Harold and Maude”.
It’s called a black comedy and a cult movie. In the early 80-ties I was not a happy person, to say the least.
Relation just gone sour, turned out I was the “rebound guy” (happy to have been of service).
The fresh started (evening)study was not a walk in the park but more like climbing the Mount Everest.
And subsequently my lack of sleep and the challenge of a new job did the rest.
When I saw this movie, I had pain in the belly from laughing, and it totally cleared my mind.
Maybe it was just the very unique combination of me and the movie, but I could not help mentioning it.
Cutthroat Island and Heaven’s Gate should be on the list too 
They are, the list on this post is only the portion I’ve seen. The complete list is in the Wikipedia article I linked.
Surprised you didn’t have any fun with Battlefield Earth–for me it’s so bad it’s good.
For whatever reason it worked for me. Of course the similarities to Mad Max are there, but I thought they put enough of a twist on it to make it worthwhile. I confess it’s been a while since I saw the original Mad Max movies though, I’ll try and remember to post when I see them again.
BTW, I could be wrong but my instinct is that urine would contain fewer impurities to filter out than seawater.
And urine is guaranteed to contain stuff that your body would filter out anyway…
The 13th Warrior was a pretty good movie although if it had been a true Beowulf adaption with mythical monsters I would have liked that even more. I haven’t seen it in ages–when I went to look for a blu-ray I discovered it never got a US release. I’ll have to break down and stream it sometime.
Wild Wild West is forgettable which I why it got 5.0 and not lower. I couldn’t remember the specifics to condemn it more fully 
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets is a pretty cool film visually and conceptually. True, it’s broken in terms of cast and narrative but it’s just so damn purdy…This one skates by pretty much on spectacle alone for me.
1 Thank
Last night I saw The Lone Ranger (2013). That was so bad it’s making me question this whole endeavor. I thought that one would at least be fun if not good! x_x
3 Thanks
Great topic.
All I have to say is:
Bring me the little man. Everyone else - no prisoners.
Two men enter. One man leaves…
All the Best, Jeff
1 Thank
i read Eaters of the Dead and saw The 13th Warrior.
both were good enough for me.
neither were worth
recommending, though.
2 Thanks
I picked up Krull (1983) on Blu-ray since it was only $5.55 which isn’t far from the cost of a digital rental.
The production design is impressive. Unfortunately, the film is let down by almost every other aspect. Writing, acting, editing, directing, stunt coordination, etc, all are lacking in my opinion.
Writing
Terrible pacing, this 2-hr movie felt like 3 hrs. A significant amount of time is spent depicting groups of traveling companions in the kind of peril that renders them immobile for an extended period of time. This seems to be a plot device which allows characters to be separated without being killed or deserting. Meanwhile, conspicuously lacking are scenes that allow us to get acquainted with and attached to the characters. Character also gain new powers/abilities with minimal effort or explanation which means their growth is unexciting.
Editing
Whoever decided what stayed and what got cut did an abominable job. They could have saved this movie from the bad writers by cutting it down and making it snappier.
Directing
The main character weeps for the loss of his wife and father, and I found myself rolling my eyes. Not because of the stigma of a man crying, but because the way he cried was like a toddler who lost his favorite toy complete with the body language. Apparently the director saw this take and thought it was good enough to move on. Just one example.
Stunt Coordination
Absolutely AWFUL. Stiff movements, ridiculous action figure poses, and obvious hesitation as they wait for the other actor to hold their sword up so they can hit it on a specific beat. I was tempted at first to give the movie a pass for being old, but then I remembered that they had good sword fights in movies long before Krull was released. The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) had a fantastic duel scene which was entertaining and dynamic. The Mark of Zorro (1940) had a very technical fight between Basil Rathbone and Tyrone Powers and that is a joy to watch. Scaramouche has an absolutely crazy duel scene at the end. And look, I get that you can’t reach that level of detail in every scene with piles of side characters and extras. But seriously, your main characters need to look like they didn’t make up their “moves” at age 12 in front of the bathroom mirror. Strike a balance. Willow (1988) is a good example of making your characters look like they have skill without teaching them how to be actual fencers.
Conclusion
Despite all of my criticism, I don’t hate this movie and will watch it again at some point. It’s just frustrating in a way because I can see this was a true classic in the making that they fumbled hard. I recognize that to some it is probably still a classic but I believe you had to grow up with it.
1 Thank