Tuesday, March 16, 2010

The 15 Worst Science Fiction Movies of All Time

Tim of Pop Crunch has a list of what he considers to be the fifteen worst science fiction films of all time. Coming in at #5 is the 1998 Bruce Willis movie Armageddon:
Seriously, the histrionic plot is bad enough, but the science of the film is so bad as to make any scientist within a 5 mile radius of a showing to spontaneously combust. They get every possible details wrong—how you would stop an asteroid; what would happen if you put explosives down a shaft in one; what would happen if you split it up; sound in space; gravity; hiring oildrillers for the thing in the first place. Throw in Ben Stiller pretending he can act and Bruce Willis
giving a textbook definition of “phoning it in”, you get an utterly crap movie, of course directed by Michael Bay.

I thought that it was okay, but Tim is correct to suggest that the movie requires simply enormous suspension of disbelief.

What movie would you add to the list? What movie would you remove from the list?

via Digg


Johnny Cat said...

The first one I thought of was The Core. Nifty story idea concocted by writers that knew zero science, and horrifically produced while wasting the talents of many fine actors.

Also, to paraphrase Tim Giachetti in the Upcoming Queue, "ZOMG! No poster credits!"

MC said...

See, I am OK with The Core because it is a science fantasy kind of movie. I expected it to be on that list though.

johnmeunier said...

I love it when science people get upset about science fiction not being science-y enough.

I get that the science in Armegeddon was stupid, but I still cry every time Bruce Willis blows himself up.

Divers and Sundry said...

Since I don't know enough about science to seriously critique it in science fiction books or movies, I treat it like magic and move on. I thought Armageddon was watchable enough. I haven't seen most of the ones on the list. It's good to see Robot Monster there, but I would think more of the old films would get a nod. What they need is a longer list.

bob said...

Going by the science there are a lot of bad films out there The Hulk, Attack of the Fifty Foot Woman,etc. etc. Whether or not we are entertained should be the overriding criteria.

Brian J. said...

In the Year of the Asteroid, I saw Deep Impact instead and ended up rooting for the rock at the end.

John said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John said...

I haven't seen The Core, but at a glance, it is beyond preposterous. I'm sort of okay with that, so as long as people act like people.

I dislike fiction the most not when the science is unscientific, but people don't act like real human beings. That's why I regard Left Behind as the worst novel that I've ever read. So bad, in fact, that I'm quite confident that I could do a better job. Events and the actions of people made sense within a certain eschatological framework, but not as human behaviors. The book was a success only because it endorsed a particular (and otherwise fiction-less) perspective within the culture war.

For roughly the same reason, I vehemently disliked the new Star Trek movie.

Dan Trabue said...

Well, not being a science-y guy, I thoroughly enjoyed Armaggedon, although I realized that it was much more fiction than science. It has Steve Buscemi being Steve Buscemi! What's not to like?

Now, it's not a movie yet (and hopefully never would be) but the worst science fiction book I've read is Crichton's State of Fear. I generally enjoy Crichton's stories, but apparently he had a BIG anti-global warming axe to grind and it takes a toll on the enjoyability of that book.

When you're rooting for the bad guys because the "good guy" is so morally preening as to be obnoxious (and not in a good way), there's something wrong with your story.

Rich said...

I, too, expected The Core. And perhaps Waterworld.

The lister is taking things much to seriously (a charge I myself I often guilty of). Lost in Space was a film for children. I didn't think Battlefeild: Earthwas all that bad as long as expectations were kept to a minimum.

Bicentennial Man was actually pretty good. In fact, it is one of the minority of movies I consider worth owning.

jockeystreet said...

I'd put the new "Star Trek" on there.

And I'd take off "Battlefield Earth." Yeah, I know it wasn't good. But for some reason I really liked it anyway.

The rest I pretty much agree with. Man, I saw "Lost In Space" in the theater. Awful, awful, awful, awful stuff.