Agree with this. I didn't read every post, but I would hope someone mentioned "Hook" too. Fucking hell is that terrible. I also hated "The Temple of Doom", maybe not his worst. But thought it was awful.

^ Hook is probably the only Spielberg movie I could never watch again. I like the premise of a grown up Peter Pan but it just misfires on everything.

It has some decent visual effects, I suppose but certainly not enough for me to ever want to revisit it.

Ready Player One is the worst Spielberg movie that i've ever seen. Indy 4 comes in at number 2. Though 1941 is the only Spielberg movie I haven't seen.

I don't think I've ever seen Hook, or even part of it outside of the tv commercials for it during its theatrical run. It didn't look interesting to me and I never went out of my way to watch it.

Another vote for Hook.

Barry Lyndon is much better than its reputation as a long, dull movie. But Eyes Wide Shut also got a reputation as a bad movie when it came out, and that became one of my favorite Kubrick movies. Then there's 2001, which I think is a work of genius, but some movie-lovers on this forum think is a pointless waste of time. Kubrick, go figure.

Again, I haven't read every post in this thread, but need to mention Robert Altman's "Popeye". He was such an odd choice to direct this film. Which failed on every level IMO. I actually saw this in the theater when it came out and I don't believe I've seen more people leave during a movie before it ended. It was a joyless mess.

Barry Lyndon is a masterpiece. Its only flaw is a crappy Ryan O'Neal performance. The cinematography alone is evolutionary.

Popeye is an ODD movie, that's for sure. I don't know what Robert Evans was thinking and/or smoking/snorting when he brought that project to Altman, but the result is absolutely fascinating. Not necessarily good, but fascinating. It's infinitely more watchable than limp go-nowheres like Pret-A-Porter.

"Odd" and "fascinating" are good ways to describe Popeye. It's just a really bizarre movie, that very effectively turns a cartoon into live action.

And, goddam, if Robin Williams and Shelley Duvall weren't brilliant casting choices for Popeye and Olive Oyl.

But I'm still, like, Robert Altman? That Robert Altman? Really?

Seriously, it's too bad you took this route. Too be a troll. You do realize that everyone has their own own opinion, and I've seen there earlier movies (so thanks for being so not cool). You do understand that people that might disagree with you? Do you understand stand? How about not being mean to people and just realizing that (I know, that's gotta be hard for you)...but if you wanna continue to be a troll, then continue...keep going bud...

What are you talking about? I wasn’t responding to you or anything you said.

I dunno. O'Neal fits the foppish dumbass character. I think here, like in Paper Moon, he fit the role. A polished actor would've been all wrong. O'Neal conned Hollywood into casting him as a leading man similar to how he frauded his way up the social ladder in Barry Lyndon.

I wouldn't hold Fear and Desire against Kubrick because it was basically his film school. Lolita would be my choice.

Also Boxcar Bertha is clearly Scorsese's worst. But, again, it's hard to hold early films against directors. Just putting yourself in position to direct a feature is a massive win and allowed them to progress to bigger and better things.

Um, yes you did. Check your your posts.

Is your name Anthony Burch? Do you write for a website called Filmwad?

No?

Then I wasn't talking to you.

It's a strange statement to say that a film is a masterpiece and that the leading actor gave a crappy performance. Generally a film isn't considered a masterpiece unless all the main roles are played to perfection.

PONYO (2008) is Hayao Miyazaki's worst film.

Not having seen 1941 my Spielberg vote goes to A.I..

I don't think there's a truly bad Tarantino film but The Hateful Eight might be the one I'm least interested in seeing again.