Roger Ebert’s picks for the 10 worst horror movies of all time

The famous film critic Roger Ebert knew how to give a film that failed to meet expectations just desserts, especially when it came to Horror. One of the most famous and beloved movie reviewers of all time, Roger Ebert clearly did not 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.” So, it’s no surprise that horror movies are heavy on Ebert’s list of most hated films.

Roger Ebert truly offered no quarter to low-budget or poorly-thought-out horror movies, which typically have an ardent fanbase willing to forgive a lot in the name of a good scare. Whether it was a prestige coup from a visionary director like M. Night Shyamalan’s filmography or simply the latest in a long line of commercially viable franchise films, Ebert can be truly ruthless with his criticism of scary movies. With how well he’s able to articulate his thoughts, it’s hard to argue with many of his names on the following films.

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 list. The second horror film from director William Friedkin after the critically-acclaimed Possession piece The ExorcistThe movie follows a couple of young parents who hire a mysterious nanny to help with the task of raising their two children. Things quickly go wrong when the couple realizes that their newly hired help is actually an ancient and vengeful nature spirit.

Roger Ebert criticized the premise of the film, mocking the apparent disconnect between the forest stand where the couple’s house sits and the geography of what is clearly Los Angeles. From there, he praised the technical filmmaking, while expressing a particular fatigue with what he saw. The Guardian Like an unfair bump in Friedkin’s unfortunate filmography. Despite its originality, the tale of ​​a Druidic evil was not enough to capture Roger Ebert’s interest.

9

13 ghosts

Ebert’s rating: 1 star

A rare debut film for a director who is also a remake of an old classic, 13 ghosts is perhaps the lowest-rated of beloved actor Matthew Lillard’s close encounters with the spooky and supernatural. Lillard stars as the resident psychic in a team of ghost hunters who seek to capture evidence of a terrifying ghost said to haunt the premises of an ancient mansion. It’s not long before the dreaded juggernaut spirit is joined by 12 other unique spirits, fulfilling the premise of the film’s haunting title.

Like many other reviewers who contributed to the abysmal score of the film Rotten Tomatoes, Roger Ebert was more than unimpressed by the horror remake. Ebert described the film’s crude sound design and visual cues as “Really painful. It hurts the eyes and ears.“, suspected that such choices were made to cover up the knowingly thin plot and lackluster final editing choices. Although he could admit that the film had some impressive production design and visualsThe screenplay and audio mix are enough to deter him quickly.

8

Critters 2: The Main Course

Ebert’s rating: 1 star

A sequel to a thin-walled ripoff of the kid-friendly Gremlins films, Critters 2: The Main Course Feels like there is no business reviewed by a critical mind as respected as Roger Ebert. Regardless, the film is on Ebert’s short list of the worst horror and science fiction has to offer. Bring back the titular creatures, Critters 2: The Main Course Takes place two years after the events of the first film, discover a new batch of critter eggs that soon hatch and wreak havoc on the town of Grover’s Bend.

Ebert has never been one to give films a break for budgetary constraints, and laid in Critters 2: The Main Course For its hockey special effects. He noted 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.”Boneing the loss of personality and production value compared to the first movie version of​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ Even if Ebert might have appreciated CrittersIts poorly conceived spawn deserves 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 may be surprising to learn that The Devil’s Rain was so poorly received by Roger Eberts. Starring big names like William Shatner and John TravoltaThe 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 chorus of universally negative reviews that bombarded The Devil’s Rain On its release. Specifically, Ebert pointed out the drawn images of Western landscapes that padded out the film’s needlessly long feature runtime, something that could not be sustained by the strength of its concept alone. An extra half star could be awarded for a few elements Ebert praised, such as the costumes and key performances, but overall, the critics’ favorite reigned supreme. The devil’s rains parade.

6

Halloween III: Time of the Witch

Ebert’s rating: 1 and 1/2 stars

By far the most infamous entry in the long run Halloween franchise, Halloween III: Time 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. It might not have drawn the ire of critics and horror fans if it weren’t for the wild premise of ​​​​​​​​​the Drakequel. The history of Halloween III: Time 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: Time of the Witchs story, backing into the Bond-esque mad scientist lair and countless references to better horror movies. Like other critics, Ebert also pointed out the senseless nature of the villain’s plan, the impetus of which is never clearly answered in the film. Still, the famous reviewer is at least able to Awarded a genuine 1/2 star for Stacey 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 about the creation of the film. Producer Roger Corman ordered the film to use only actor Robert Quarry’s remaining contracted days, painting an ominous picture of the slapdash horror picture’s ability to succeed creatively. The Deathmaster posits Quarry as a cult leader named Horda, who is secretly a vampire, plotting nefarious schemes for his horde of human followers.

Hilariously, Ebert uses his review to estimate just how long Quarry was on the hook during the production of the master of death, Guessing only a 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 declared to be particularly unintelligent. Ebert explained, “In fact, they are so dumb that they have to learn to speak the English language by watching old AIP exploitation movies, and Their dialogue is eight years old.“

4

Resident Evil

Ebert’s rating: 1 star

Infamously, Ebert once made controversial initial statements that confirmed video games can never be art. Thus, it is no surprise that a horror movie based on a game long before the “video game curse” was broken not to touch him critically. Loosely based on 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 bothered to name Jovovich and Rodriguez’s characters, who are credited with different names in official material. He also did not go easy on the dialogue, notice that “TThe characters have no small talk. Their dialogue consists of commands, explanations, exclamations and ejaculations.” Although 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

Roger Ebert was one of many voices described by many as the beginning of M. Night Shyamalan’s cinematic downfall. The Village. The film takes place in an isolated, rural community in the early 19th century, which is guarded by mysterious monsters that emerge from the forest, with all the villagers following strict rules to avoid their sorrow. The Village is famous for containing one of Shyamalan’s most daring and disrespectful twist endings ever.

Compared to other low-rated horror films that Ebert seemed to have only a weary disinterest in, the well-respected critic was furious about Shyamalan’s ending. The Village. He punctuated his frustrations by claiming “In fact, it’s so uncomfortable that when we discover the secret, we want to rewind the film so we don’t know the secret anymore.“Except at the end, Ebert was also driven to despair by the lack of emotion in the performances and the sad 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 atrocious action-slag mess that is the Resident Evil Film franchise. Still 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 Sheep City, and the heroes struggle to save the daughter of a powerful official who can extract them before the entire metropolitan area is blown to destruction.

Ebert has little constructive criticism to offer Resident Evil: Apocalypsecall it “A dead zone, a film without interest, wit, fantasy or even entertaining violence and special effects.“ His prose about the film reads so tiresomely that he even quotes his review of the previous film, and it’s obvious to dissect the failings of what he saw as a cynical cash grab. for his sins, Resident Evil: Apocalypse Enjoys the lowest 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 The franchise isn’t exactly critically acclaimed for its countless sequels, and Roger Ebert’s thoughts on the first of them make it clear why. Hellbound: Hellraiser II Picks up just hours after the original left, with the traumatized Christie, who has rushed to the hospital from her terrifying encounter with the sadomasochistic cenobites. It is not long until the halls of her hospital become the layers of hell itself, and Christy finds herself again helpless in another hellish nightmare.

Ebert was never one to enjoy Gore for Gore’s sake, and dismissed it Hellbound: Hellraiser II like “Simply a series of gruesome images that can be watched in any order.“ Besides the overload of disturbing images, Ebert also does not miss the lazy construction of the film, finding ironic humor in the over-reliance of protagonists Christy and Tiffany simply shouting each other’s names over and over again while wandering the annals of hell. Due to the lack of history, Hellbound: Hellraiser II Turns out to be Ebert’s most scorned subject Horror movie Reviews.