Perhaps but I still find the execution rather poor. If it wasn't for the comedy and the performance of Campbell I likely would have put it into a bad movie-pile rather than bad movie but like-pile.

Anyway, why does it matter? It's only my opinion.

Yeah, but really really bad opinion. :p

...

I'm just being pedantic, I don't mind anyone personally hating aspects of the movie (or any movie), but the thread is about movies that are generally considered "bad" and AOD is a bit too respected to really fall into that category.

I love your other picks though, I almost said The Room myself, but I place Battlefield Earth above it because it was made by far more people on a far bigger scale, so the scope of the incompetence is that much higher.

Still, it's hard to say which has the best-worst performance, Travolta as Terl or Wiseau as Johnny.

I might have have exagerrated how much I dislike the movie, but I might have remembered correctly. It's now a few years ago I watched it and I only watched it one time unfortunately.

Haha yeah, Battlefield Earth is a bad-masterpiece. I would agree that it has a larger fall-from-potential-performance than The Room but the latter has such awkward moments and repeated scenes that's almost brilliantly done by someone who didn't even realize it (or is one of those man geniuses but works in the film industry).

Yeah The Room is a pretty damn impressive piece of idiocy, Tommy Wiseau's performance is just so... strange and awkward, it's hypnotic to watch. Honestly if it came out that he was really an alien in disguise I wouldn't be even remotely surprised, in fact it'd make far more sense than his currently vague personal details.

Though the character Denny gives him a run for his money due to sheer, baffling creepiness.

So true.

Pootie Tang

I must admit I like it as well. Actually there aren't many Costner films I didn't like. Tetonka.
One of my favorites. Nothing like an attractive girl walking around naked the whole film sucking out people's life force. I was really pulling for the nymph. So, a really shitty ending in my book, but the first half was great.

Top Secret.

Wait, the movie is called Top Secret, not that my favorite bad movie is a top secret.

Many may think it's not a bad movie but a classic, but it didn't do well at the box office and it's satire a la Airplane and Naked Gun, though compared to those two and its sequels, Top Secret is the least known.

Spaceballs, how is that a bad movie. A classic Mel Brooks film with lots of laughs.

Try re-watching it, and you'll see how cheesy it is. I've also had fond memories of it, but after re-watching about 2-3 months ago, I didn't find it that good anymore.

One of my favourite bad movies is 1983 made "Prisoners of the Lost Universe". It's a cheesy sci-fi fantasy flick, in which a proefessor has invented a portal to an another world. A reporter, the professor and a repairman end up in the machine in an earthquake just to end up in a world where exotic flowers seems to painted paper plates. And one alien species is filmed in black and white, with flashing red eyes. Low budget, cheesy, yet fun.

One comment on some movies people mention:

Just because a movie is a movie of a genre that doesnt come with a lot of depth and the movie doesnt try to jump over the borders of that genre doesnt mean its a bad movie.

In english: Just because a movie is a simple actionmovie or a simple comedy doesnt make it automatically bad.

Not every actionmovie is Terminator, doesnt make every other actionmovie bad.

How are:

The first Conan
The Road Warrior aka Mad Max 2
Highlander
Escape from New York

bad movies?

Explain internet. Why are masterpieces, classics in regard of storytelling and pure technical achievemnts, movies that stood the test of time, why are those all of a sudden bad movies?

And i only picked examples that are no questions asked movies every filmfan should have respect for, there are a lot of movies in this thread that hit the middle ground or are at least open for discussion, but from a short glimpse at the thread those are some of the many that take the cake.

I mean no disrespect to the people that named those titles, but those are absolutely not bad movies. Maybe you dont like them, but that doesnt mean they are bad, but if you dont like them you failed this thread too.

If you guys are interested and open for discussion, we may discuss what makes which movie bad or good.

I will take the Road Warrior as one example.
Lets take the story and mood that the film perfectly combines to achieve the post apocalyptic feeling out o the way, since there is still a bit subjectivity at work. But the language of the film alone makes it a masterpiece. And by language i dont mean words. In fact count the words that mad max says. He says like a dozen lines in the whole movie, and i bet you didnt regognize that. And why didnt you recognize that? Because the language of that movie is visuality and not words. 90 % of what happens in The Road Warrior is delivered through visuals. If you dont understand what people say, you will still understand what is going on. And that is filmschool at its finest.

Have you seen "Hawk the Slayer"? Same director, some of the same actors, similar "quality" production. Oh, and they use bouncy-balls and silly string to simulate magic spells. :p
To be fair, I think a lot of those movies get lumped in because they're the sort of movie that people who like bad movies will also like. They do often tend to have a similar "feel" to them, even when that feel is by design and lavishly produced. See my earlier comments re: how "bad movie" discussions tend to wander all over the "enjoyably cheesy" spectrum without specifically worrying about whether a particular movie is actually "bad" in the stricter sense of the term.