Forbes magazine recently announced The Fifth Estate to be the biggest financial flop of the year. But is this really the worst film of 2013?

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments.

  • Comment number 94. Posted by Just Bob aka Robert Thompson

    on 16 Dec 2013 23:57

    Not only is The Fifth Estate not the worst film, I have seen this year, it's the best! Admittedly, I am talking here about the year as defined by IMDb, which I gather is related to the American release date.
    The best film I have seen at the cinema this calendar year is Les Miserables, which totally bowled me over and sped straight into my all-time Top 10.
    Worst film? Of 2013, Star Trek Into Darkness. In 2012, Maniac. Neither actually that bad, although I am sure I will catch some of the utter tripe in years to come. As for the worst film I have seen this year from any era, either The Human Centipede or Mighty Morphin Power Rangers: The Movie. Make of that combo what you will.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 94: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 94: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 93. Posted by Gabriella

    on 16 Dec 2013 10:37

    All this user's posts have been removed. Why?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 93: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 93: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 92. Posted by FaithHealer1

    on 13 Dec 2013 18:14

    It's always a shame when people equate quality with financial takings, and film as commodity and how that all relates to funding is a whole other discussion, but here's my tuppence'worth:

    One of my very favourite films wasn't just unprofitable at the time of its release, but was also panned critically. By any measure, The Night of the Hunter deserved far better than that, and happily it now has the reputation it deserves. While I wouldn't equate Fifth Estate with that, I think the point stands that immediate financial (or even critical) success shouldn't matter remotely when it comes to the 'value' of a film. It's obvious here: The 5th Estate has some merit. Compare and contrast with Movie 43...

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 92: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 92: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 91. Posted by jcarr73729

    on 12 Dec 2013 22:58

    Thanks to the Friday radio show and this blog I've missed most of the stinkers, but if you need a spell-checker for your opening titles I'm available. "Fiilm"?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 91: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 91: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 90. Posted by Alina

    on 11 Dec 2013 15:30

    This movie was never made to attract box office so judging it by box office is irrelevant. No-one makes a movie about Assange because they want to make money.

    And I suspect that Forbes has unleashed the Streisand effect - by declaring this to be the Worst Film of the Year I predict that many more people will now watch it.

    However the far more important question is - how did Cumberbatch do with an Australian accent? As an Australian I have to congratulate Cumberbatch for delivering the most convincing Australian accent by a non-Australian that has ever been depicted on film.

    With some of his lines I wouldn't have been able to distinguish him from a real Aussie. Rendering a convincing Aussie accent as a non-Australian is a phenomenal achievement that has been matched by *no other actor in the history of film*. For this the man deserves an academy award.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 90: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 90: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 89. Posted by Nick

    on 11 Dec 2013 08:54

    I still think the worst film of the year was the Lone Ranger.

    I actually say through it. It's pathetic in a word. It was like "Hey, here's the team behind Pirates if the Caribbean" - as if that meant anything. They made 3 average films and one good film in the first, ten years ago now.

    The fact that they cancelled the latest POTC film or franchise instalment speaks volumes of how Disney have bottled it. They've lost faith in an overblown, paper thin concept with bloated costs and a ridiculously overpaid star in Johnny Depp. Thank goodness.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 89: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 89: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 88. Posted by PJ Hughes

    on 10 Dec 2013 13:41

    #87 In a way the financial element may be an indicator, but one would have to consider things likely publicity, how it is released (some may get broader release than others) etc

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 88: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 88: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 87. Posted by RoyalTen

    on 10 Dec 2013 08:57

    Agree with post above. Would love to get the Good Doctor's opinion on it http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-25302988
    Can't judge a film or industry's performance solely on financial performance, but surely it has to be a significant factor?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 87: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 87: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 86. Posted by information1st

    on 9 Dec 2013 15:02

    BBC: Does it matter that only 7% of British films make a profit?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-25302988

    Related and very worth reading.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 86: 1
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 86: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 85. Posted by jayfurneaux

    on 9 Dec 2013 09:09

    Watched jack the Giant Slayer over the weekend hoping it’d have some redeeming features that justified its cost. But no, easily the worst film I’ve seen this year with very poor CGI and a terrible script.

    The idea of Jack and the Beanstalk might have worked as a Disney animation (they made Mickey and the Beanstalk in 1947) but as a live action fantasy it’s a dismal watch, particularly compared with other modern day fantasy films such as LOTRs.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 85: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 85: 0
    Loading…
More comments

More Posts

Previous

Next