Top Ten Underrated Villains

Hello associates,

I've wanted to do a villains list from the minute I started this blog, but my main problem was "its been done before." Every Halloween, Spike or SciFi or Bravo have a top villains countdown and I always have seen the same usual suspects on top... Darth Vader, Hannibal Lecter, the Wicked Witch, Norman Bates, Hans Gruber, Freddy Kruger, the shark from Jaws, etc. I could write up that same list, because honestly, those are the iconic villains that a lot of people know and love. So I decided instead to come up with ten villains that have slipped through the cracks for whatever reason in the popular mind. It's a group of performances that are in fairly major movies, but whenever I see "best of" lists, they never show up. So without further ado...

Honorable Mention - Vincent Cassel in Brotherhood of the Wolf, The Nothing in Neverending Story, Stephen Dorff in Blade, Ben Stiller in Heavyweights, and the 2 main antagonists from Battle Royale

10. Ed Harris as General Francis Hummel, The Rock

Ed Harris' portrayal of Hummel shows what a talented actor can do with a stock villain role. I think he's underrated because a lot of people remember the Rock for the explosions, the Sean Connery one liners, and another mopey Nick Cage embarassment. Besides Harris, you also get Tony Todd (Candyman!), David Morse, and John C. McGinley (Dr. Cox!) as the members of his Marine squad.

Hummel holds the city of San Francisco hostage with a stockpile of biological weapons, yet when push comes to shove, Hummel does not try to take lives. Almost any stock villain would fail because the heroes defuse the bomb or stop him, but Hummel fails because of his moral values and beliefs. His actions don't seem weak or pathetic, but more like what a realistic career military man would do.

As an audience, you run the full range of emotions with him... you sense he's just trying to do his job and I love his reaction when the mariners led my personal favorite Michael Biehn try to invade Alcatraz. During the fierce gunfight that ensues, there's a fairly quite shot of Harris' face. His facial expression relays so much emotino compared to the typically hammy acting military villains from action movies. For being so three dimensional and realistic, Harris as General Hummel takes the place to start the list.


9. Tim Roth as Archibald Cunningham, Rob Roy

I had a hard time putting this performance on the list, as Roth did receive an Academy Award Best Supporting Actor nomination (losing to Kevin Spacey in Usual Suspects who in my opinion should have been up for Best Actor...). However, in the years since 1996, it seems like Rob Roy has been somewhat forgotten. Also, Cunningham disappears for decent chunks of the movie and is the henchman to John Hurt's aristocratic character.

If you haven't seen it, the skilled yet effeminate Cunningham has the job of tracking down the rebel highlander Rob Roy. Despite his 'fancy' and 'dandy' exterior, he proves himself to be a ruthless and formidable foe. By the time this raping, stealing, murdering, wig-wearing aristocratic psychopath finally crosses swords with Liam Neeson's Roy, you've never wanted to see a movie villain die more. Fortunately, the amazing ending doesn't disappoint. After simply annihilating Liam Neeson for what seems like ten minutes... well, check it out... (sorry about the Polish subtitles, but there isn't much dialogue and this is the tightest edit of the fight I could find) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27M5KWI_q50&feature=PlayList&p=8BD409B68B76405D&index=0&playnext=1. So for a cool, nasty, and girly display of evil, Roth makes it on the list.

8. Michael Wincott as Top Dollar, The Crow

So if Roth gets on for abuse of Liam Neeson, then Wincott gets on for being responsible for killing the main character right away (and that's not a Brandon Lee joke, its in the plot). The original Crow has been forgotten and it seems like all people remember is the unfortunate death of Brandon Lee. Wincott has made a career of using his amazingly gravelly voice to play an assortment of pretty cool villains, like in Robin Hood Princes of Thieves, Along Came a Spider, Dead Man, and the Count of Monte Cristo. I think his best overall performance comes as this criminal mastermind in the 1994 Crow.

Top Dollar is interesting because he's first and foremost a businessman and only hates the Crow because he's losing money. Dollar's fallen on hard times and is trying to get his organization back its former glory. He's smart, organized, and vile, sleeping with his sister and encouraging drug deals. For most of the movie, he uses his various henchmen (including Candyman himself, Tony Todd) yet fares quite well himself in the climatic battle against the superhuman vigilante (wounding the titular bird does tip the scales in his favor). For combining scuzz with smooth, Wincott makes the list as this nasty capitalist.


7. Colin Farrell as Bullseye, Daredevil

After a meteoric rise to stardom, Colin Farrell's career tumbled after a series of mediocre starring performances (Alexander anyone?). Bullseye is a completely psychopathic hitman with the mutant power of superhuman reflexes giving him perfect accuracy with handheld weaponry. Given that over a dozen Marvel movies have been released in the last 10 years or so, to me, Daredevil tends to get lost in the mix (the non-chemistry/acting of the Affleck-Garner love story helped that out, as well as a last second studio decision to change the rating from R to PG-13).
Farrell as Bullseye just seems to have a lot of fun and genuinely enjoys what he does, while still being menacing and a threat. This balance of humor and intensity is what makes Bullseye memorable and elevates him over some of his more serious contemporaries (Yes, Ian McKellan's portrayal of Magento has more depth and substance, but that character isn't exactly underrated). Bonus points can be given to the producers/director for having Bullseye use Farrell's natural Irish accent.


6. John Hurt (voice) as the Horned King, The Black Cauldron

Somehow, someway he's a Disney villain... yikes! During my animated characters countdown, I revealed my love for the Black Cauldron, part of which stems from this amazingly evil villain, the Horned King. Many of the iconic Disney villains that tend to make these lists are at least a bit comedic (Captain Hook, Cruella DeVil, Ursula) in one way or another. The Horned King has no funny side... He's a red robed, red eyed, skeletal, antler wearing despot with plans of world conquest. That's right, his scheme involves taking over the world, which runs contrary to the normal Disney motivation of messing with a princess or cute animal, maybe even taking over the African savannah or a European castle.

His method for doing so is even creepier... find a magical cauldron with arcane power, fill it with the bodies of warriors his armies have killed, and then ressurect them as an unstoppable army of the undead. The Horned King also commands a living army of thuggish warrior as well as vicious pteradactyl type creatures called Gwythaints, all of whom are dominated by fear and intimidation. The Horned King scores so low for two reasons, 1.) he doesn't really do a lot himself besides be a creepy menace and 2.) he makes the classic James Bond villain mistake of imprisoning instead of killing the heroes which makes him a not quite as effective in my opinion.

(I appreciate theatrically trained British character actor types quite a bit - this may be an ongoing theme for this list). The Horned King's voice is provided by the distinguished and distinctive Brit John Hurt. Hurt tends to play more emotionally anguished and complex protagonists or is often used as a narrator. However, he shows his range by playing an ugly, menacing villain (actually a more subtle performance than his villainous dictator in V for Vendetta). Horned King deserves his spot for being a big part of why the Black Cauldron was the first PG rated animated Disney movie.


5. Christopher Plummer as General Chang, Star Trek VI The Undiscovered Country

My level of enjoyment of Star Trek is a fairly mixed bag. I have fond memories of the original series and the Next Generation as a kid, and I do enjoy several of the movies, but I did not follow any of the later series (so I think that makes me a casual Trekkie). Whenever I bring up Star Trek villains, three tend to come up... the most overused - the Klingons, the most visually striking/menacing - the Borg, and the hammiest - Ricardo Montalban as Khan. Since rarely are specific Klingons mentioned, Christopher Plummer's portrayal of Chang deserves recognition as not only the best Klingon villain, but a great villain in his own right (I just think personally a lot of people dismiss Star Trek VI as the one where the cast looks really, really old (the actors were in their late 50s to early 70s at the time of filming) or the one with the clumsy Cold War analogies (fairly true). I think the filmmakers realized this and had the story be sort of a Star Trek meets Tom Clancy/CSI which was more cereberal and less physical for the most part.).

The Klingons on Star Trek are a brutish warrior race that live by honor, but unlike the stereotypical brash and stupid villains (Christopher Lloyd's Klingon character from Star Trek 3) Chang is a scheming, intelligent planner. Instead of trying to blow up the Earth with a superweapon, Chang uses political trickery to assassinate political leaders, mentally toying around with the primary cast leading to the imprisonment of Kirk and McCoy. This realistic motivation combined with the class and elegance the classically trained Plummer (Unfortunate that despite Plummer's acting skills, he's never been even nominated for an Oscar, he has won 2 Emmy and 2 Tony awards) brings to the part makes him a great villain. I also like the visual look of the character, at Plummer's request, they didn't coat him with prosthetics, letting the character have more complex emotions (props go to the intimidating eyepath held on by three screws... now that's tough). I think the Shakespeare quoting, cool, yet devious Chang deserves his spot on the list.


4. Thomas Ian Griffith as Terry Silver, Karate Kid part III

The first Karate Kid movie has two memorable villains in the evil Cobra Kai disciple Billy Zabka as Johnny Lawrence and his mentor, John Kreese, played by Martin Kove, but to me, they don't hold up after watching the master of evil, Terry Silver, in part 3.

After the original villains are humiliated by Danielsan and Mr. Miyagi (and after a sequel that doesn't expand on this particular story much at all), Kreese contacts his Vietnam war vet friend, Terry Silver, to help him get revenge. The character of Terry Silver is incredibly rich, dresses extremely well, happens to also be a black belt karate sensei, and he makes his living by illegally dumping toxic waste...

Thomas Ian Griffith plays the smarmy asshole of a character perfectly (He might have the best evil smirk in movie history through the early parts of the movie). I personally love that he schemes and negotiates both in a sauna and while taking a bubblebath. He sets up a bunch of run ins with Daniel to gain his trust, telling him Kreese has died, and training him in his own form of karate. Silver makes it a point to train Daniel the wrong way, telling him to use his anger and turning him against Mr. Miyagi. I definitely acknowledge that the idea that a billionaire would devote his personal time and resources to defeat and humiliate a local teenage karate champion is extremely ridiculous (Karate Kid 3 does not = realism). Griffith has so much fun with the part, not taking things too seriously, as his character in real life probably wouldn't. Overcoming such impossible odds is why Karate Kid 3 works as a movie at all, as by the end you really want Daniel-san to take this maniac down once and for all.


3. Elijah Wood as Kevin, Sin City

Now we get to the serious evil... This is probably the second best example of "casting against type" on this list. Kevin in the comics is more of a middle aged typical 'molester' and seemed menacing, but not quite as interesting at first. Then, you learn that Kevin is a cannibal who feeds the leftovers to his mostly feral pet wolf and keeps the heads on his wall... over the top and ridiculous, yes, but so is the rest of the Sin City universe. I love the movie adaptation, and I think this performance tends to get lost in the mix (if I had written this right after Sin City came out, I don't Wood would be as underrated).

Robert Rodriguez's decision to cast the innocent hobbit (only Rings joke in this section, I promise!) as the vicious killer made things all the creepier. At first, I thought it was gross miscasting, but changing the character's age and tweaking the look was a huge improvement. In the role, Elijah Wood has no lines of dialogue, yet manages to convey emotion extremely well through body language and his expressive eyes.

Part of what made Kevin so menacing is how much trouble he gives Marv (Mickey Rourke). Marv's combination of size and strength coupled with his fighting abilities makes him seemingly superhuman, yet the much smaller Kevin gives him more physical trouble than anyone else in the movie. The reasons he shows up this low o my countdown are his lack of screen time and relative unimportance to the overall plot (I think of him like Boba Fett from the first Star Wars trilogy). Yet he more then earns his spot with his distinctive look (love the glasses and preppy sweater), his spectacular comeuppance, and that the character made Elijah Wood frightening.


2. Frank Langella as Skeletor, Masters of the Universe

Masters of the Universe is a fatally flawed movie, yet this performance gets lost in the general sillyness of seeing He-Man fight evil in the suburbs of New Jersey. Frank Langella is a criminally underused and underrated actor, often appearing as stock villains in awful movies such as Cutthroat Island, Junior, and the Whoopi Goldberg opus, Eddie. When given a script that has the chance to flex his sizable acting chops, he can put together a performance like his portrayal of Richard Nixon in Frost vs. Nixon or his take of Dracula in the late 70s.

Skeletor in the cartoon He-Man was a fairly goofy yet visually dynamic villain with typical plans for world conquest and incompetent henchmen. The movie Skeletor comes across as an intelligent, persuasive schemer who retains the craze for power his predecessor had. The makeup on Langella is pretty good for the time period and budget and the costume/ram's head staff look genuine.

For such a crummy movie, Langella puts forth a ton of effort to make Skeletor a somewhat layered, menacing, and all around bad guy. I really love the monologue he delivers at the end when Skeletor gets the power of the universe. It's an amazingly moving and intense and I actually am rooting for Skeletor a bit as he finally is able to match He-Man physically. So for taking a buffoonish villain out of a badly animated show and making him a believable foe, Skeletor takes his spot on the list.


1. Ted Levine as Jame Gumb/Buffalo Bill, Silence of the Lambs

This performance is why I came up with this list, because lost behind the iconic, Academy Award winning Anthony Hopkins was this amazing characterization of a serial killer. Ted Levine is a talented character actor who usually plays cops, military types, or similar authority figures (Heat, Hills Have Eyes remake, and the boss on Monk are the three other roles that popped to mind). It wasn't until well after I saw the movie that I connected Gumb with any other part that Levine has played (trying to illustrate how unrecognizable he is).

For starters, the character is written as a somewhat feminine transvestite. On paper, there's definitely potential for Gumb to be silly or funny and not as scary. Ted Levine reportedly spent some time with transvestites in bars in order to not make the character a complete caricature. He also purposefully avoided villain roles in the years after the Silence of the Lambs was released to avoid being typecast. His dedication and hard work pays off as Gumb comes across as psychotic and disturbing in a somewhat realistic sort of way. In my opinion, the entire "lotion-dog-pit" sequence would be one of the best 'serial killer' scenes in any movie.

Finally, a good chunk of why Silence of the Lambs works so well is that the character of Jame Gumb is so threatening and out there. The search to catch him becomes so intense that the advice of Hannibal Lector becomes crucial. Strangely, while reading about this character, I found out the author Thomas Harris based the main plot of Silence of the Lambs on a true story, but not the story of noted serial killer Ed Gein (who definitely influenced the character of Hannibal Lector). I found it personally incredible, but a Seattle detective actually sought out the advice of Ted Bundy to try and catch the Green River Killer.

So there's my list... Check the movies if you haven't seen any yet...

Pandorum and Surrogates

September... The month where the kids go back to school, Bumbershoot happens, baseball rosters get really big, and Jason Statham releases another crappy action movie. In general, September and January are the two 'dump months' of the calendar year... when studios release movies that they have little faith in ( or that will only appeal to a limited audience (Stomp the Yard or Tyler Perry's latest endeavor).

Surrogates and Pandorum were both released the last weekend of September 2009. Surrogates was the higher budgeted movie at 80 M, grossing a combined 60.5 M worldwide and domestic. It also featured a bigger 'name' cast, headlined by Bruce Willis and a trailer featured Mr. Willis fighting robots. Pandorum cost 40 M, but failed to crack 15 M worldwide. Pandorum's previews gave it a Resident Evilish vibe, it was produced by Paul W.S. Anderson (the man behind the Mortal Kombat movie, the Death Race remake, and all 3 live action Res Evil films), and starred the poor man's Harrison Ford, Dennis Quaid.

Based on those descriptions... Surrogates obviously comes out on top, having at least a chance to make back some money on bluray/dvd sales and rentals, but both were financial failures. I'm not to going into a lot of detail reviewing these, because both were fairly derivative... but some quick bullet pointish thoughts.

Surrogates... The central concept is that in the near future, 98% of people live their lives through robotic 'surrogates' that can get into dangerous situations while keeping their owners harmfree and far away. In and itself, its not bad idea for a movie, and personally, I hope that some day war could fought in that sort of way... just robots fighting and keeping humans safer.

The acting for the most part is decent enough. Willis goes through the motions, using his combination of cynicism, inventiveness, and vulnerablility to play the same character he's played many times before. Supporting cast... Rastafarian Ving Rhames was entertaning (its a different sort of character than his usual 'tough guy'), James Cromwell (the farmer from Babe) played another grumpy authority figure, and Radha Mitchell, while fairly attractive, really needs more fleshed out parts in movies. I'd like to figure out if its the writing or her talent why she's so bland and forgettable, but not really bad.

Plotwise, Surrogates was decent (how the Matrix started meets I, Robot describes it well) and the ending actually makes a lot of sense, its just the setup that makes the whole film crumble. Offhand, there are enough problems with the concepts of surrogate robots that it just killed the movie for me. I watched this yesterday... and I've come up with 5 reasons to prove how stupid it is (no real spoilers here, if you watch the first few minutes of the movie, these issues should be obvious).

1. Why isn't everyone obese? I mean, you'd still have to eat and drink, but controlling a surrogate means you pretty much are immobile in a chair the whole day.

2. Wouldn't this kill off the massive restaurant industry? I mean, the surrogates themselves don't have to eat anything and that's 98% of the population moving around in this movie. I mean, they could bring back carryout, but I can't see a bunch of people sending their robots to get Jack in the Box tacos...

3. How cheap are these super advanced surrogates? Everyone seems to have them, and they are super advanced (I think there's a 10 year timeline or so in the intro from when they get invented to mass produced). Think about personal computers, I mean it took at least 10 years just to have something like the Apple 2GS, Amiga, or Commodore 64 from the room sized computers of the 70s... I can't believe that they would be that affordable for 'everyone' to have them...

4. The surrogates seem to be as strong and agile as the script calls for. At some points, they are really strong, can jump almost like Spiderman, take a fair amount of damage... This isn't a spoiler, its in every preview! Yet, in some scenes, they get taken out in just stupid ways. I realize that average people are 'behind the wheel' but if I had one of these things, I'd be jumping and climbing around everywhere. I mean, it would be expensive and maybe a little silly to have everyone bounding around like kangaroos, but even from an efficiency standpoint, it doesn't make sense. Its not like the robots get tired! (they could lose battery power maybe, but there seems to be recharging stations everywhere!)

5. This last one REALLY ground my gears. The surrogate robots use cell phones to communicate and talk to each other like humans! Think about this, these superadvanced robots controlled by wireless signal from great distances still use cell phones? Think about the Matrix, the Agents just sort of thought to each other through their earpieces. When Trinity needed piloting skill in the first Matrix, they just uploaded it into her brain, and she was a human! I mean, I realize the movie needs dialogue or else it would be really boring if robots just gave each other all knowing looks back and forth. For a non robot equivalent, instead of bluetooths, people starting using those old rotary phones..

Enough ranting about the stupidity of Surrogates and onto Pandorum...

I can't really say much about the plot without completely ruining it.

So instead, I'll discuss the setup a bit though, its about two crewman on a spaceship played by Ben Foster (Angel from Xmen3 or the crazy sharpshooter from 3:10 to Yuma) and Dennis Quaid trying to fix their damaged ship. See, they are trying to get from Earth to some distant planet without a Star Trek/Wars warp drive. This would take a really, really long time, so there are many different 'shifts' of crewmen who work for a few years, then go back to a deep cryogenic sleep. This seems like the way you'd handle a manned interstellar mission...

Alpha Centauri, the nearest star to our solar system... is 4.5 light years away. Meaning if we sent a spaceship at 1/10th light speed (which is currently technologically possible, but would be ridiculously expensive), it would get there in 45 or so years. It would then take another 45 years to get back to earth. Given the limitations of human life expectancy and the difficulties of raising children in space to man a return mission, this would seem insurmountable. However, what if you had 6 shifts of people operating the same ship? Each would only be awake for roughly 15 years, and if you could cryogenically freeze them so that they couldn't age in the meantime (well, that in and itself is sort of silly), it would help with the aging problem.

Problem is, making a movie about a long trip like that would be tedious at best, so, we get some bland monsters that are a blend of the Ghosts of Mars and Gollum. These chase our heroes around dimly lit corridors, feast on a diet of extras and supporting characters, and disappear when the script needs to get in some exposition. Yep, the middle section is a lot like the crappier parts of the first 3 Alien movies, especially the 'running through the tunnels' part from Alien3. However, the ending pulls everything back together and had a twist I didn't really anticipate at all.

So if you want a September sci movie with an interesting concept, bland action, and a cool ending, skip Surrogates and check out Pandorum.

That's all I have to say about that.

Bottom 7 movies of 2009

I watch a lot of movies. That statement shouldn't be a big surprise to anyone. I feel like I should do a 'year in review' so I'll give my top and bottom 7.

I'm only considering cinematic releases, so all straight to DVD movies aren't up for consideration (number 1 would be utterly dreadful S. Darko) So I'll start at the bottom 7, the worst of 2009 (I haven't seen Old Dogs or Alvin and the Chipmunks 2, so they are omitted)...

Dishonorable mentions (the next 7 in no particular order); Transformers; Revenge of the Fallen, The Uninvited, Haunting of Molly Hartley, Confessions of a Shopaholic, Paul Blart Mall Cop, Fighting, and Babylon A.D.

7. Year One

Jack Black = funny, Michael Cera = funny, Harold Ramis = funny, Black+Cera+Ramis = amazingly unfunny. For starters, the idea of cavemen wandering through biblical times does have some comic potential (I was hoping for something like Mel Brook's History of the World). Ramis assembled a who's who of comedians for the supporting cast, including Hank Azaria, David Cross, Paul Rudd, Christopher 'McLovin' Mintz-Plasse, Kyle "Tenacious D" Gass, and Bill Hader. The problem is, Black and Cera lazily play their normal 'types' (Black constantly mugs, wiggles his eyebrows and dances around, Cera talks really quietly and is awkward around women, etc.) while most of the supporting cast get very little screen time and have little impact on the story. The worst offender of the supporting cast is the terrifically unfunny and overly hairy Oliver Platt as a high priest (and I even sort of liked Platt in Lake Placid, so that should give an example of how awful he is here).

Its like Ramis assembled his cast and forgot to give them anything remotely funny to do. The humor involves too many pratfalls, tired homophobic routines (yep, some things about the Romans would seem fairly gay by today's standards), and dumb scatological jokes (a poop joke that was better in the 3rd American Pie). A lot of money got put into the costumes and sets (the movie had a budget of 60 M, fairly high for a straight comedy) but none was put into the story or script. This movie makes the list over the other contenders because the three or four good jokes are all in the preview (only Bill Hader's sadly brief appearance would be the sole exception), making the following hour and forty minutes an extremely boring, unfunny affair.

6. Dragonball Evolution

This movie was poorly edited and written, had a delayed theatrical release, and then dumped to theaters in April 2009. Given the difficult to adapt source material and that the budget was slashed from 100 M in preproduction down to 30 M for production, I feel a little bad for this movie from the start. It seems like 20th Century Fox has been steadily accumulating the rights to a number of properties with a strong built in 'core' audience (The Seeker, Eragon, Hitman, Garfield, Fantastic Four, etc.). Then, the resulting movie adaptations get as little effort into budget and script as possible. The ensuing cheap cinematic abortions then are dumped to theaters hoping to lure in the enthusiastic fan base and thus cash in on the 'name' value (and so far have mostly tanked).

For casting, despite being set in Japan, Canadian Justin Chatwin is miscast as the lead Son Goku as is Emmy Rossum as the blue haired inventor Bulma. Amidst a sea of awfulness in the supporting cast, Chow Yun-Fat hammily enjoys himself as Master Roshi while an underwritten James Marsters evils it up as Lord Piccolo. Vegita, the most interesting and popular character from the anime, doesn't even appear at all. I think a good 30 M Dragonball movie starring a Canadian was doomed from the very start, so this is low on my "bad" list.

5. Knowing

Most of Knowing wasn't 'that' bad, having an interesting concept and being helmed by Alex Proyas, (who joins David Goyer in the "creative people I love that made a horrible 2009 movie" list) the director of Dark City and the first Crow. Nick Cage is only moderately irritating, there are a couple cool action sequences, and the cinematography is decent. However, with about a half hour to go, the movie goes from alright to a big bag of sloppy goose shit. Where do I begin?

If there was a giant solar flare, the levels of UV radiation would greatly increase thereby increasing the frequency and rate of cancer. The characters talk about UV radiation a couple different times... Yet, the climax (given away in the previews) features a giant ID4 style fireball engulfing most of the world. Apparently, people dying of radiation < stuff exploding! To paraphrase what happens in the end of the movie... what if at the end of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, after Indy found the Grail and reconciled with his father, got crushed by the falling debris in the temple? Wouldn't that suck? Yep, it would, and so did this movie, featuring one the worst endings of any major movie that I've seen.

4. Street Fighter, Legend of Chun Li

There have been a lot of terrible video game movies, so I tend to give most of them a little more latitude given their weak subject matter. What's wrong with this sequel? For a game with literally dozens of characters, we only get 7 in this movie - Chun Li, M. Bison, Charlie, Vega, Balrog, Gen, and Rose. What's wrong with this list? For starters, the first Street Fighter movie focused on Guile, so his omission is fine, but to me, the sequel had to be about the HaDouken twins, Ken and Ryu (the 2 most popular characters). Not only are they not part of the plot, they aren't even in the movie at all (except for a name drop towards the end). This would be the equivalent of having X-Men 2 be all about Storm and leaving Wolverine completely out.

Next, some awful casting decisions... Michael Clarke Duncan as Balrog is about the only thing that works... In the opening montage, Chun Li grows up from being obviously of Asian descent to the Canadian Kristen Kreuk (who does a decent job with the martial arts and puts forth a decent acting effort). Neal McDonough seems more like a standard mob boss than the evil dictator M. Bison (He's no Raul Julia and he's the completely wrong physical type). The guy playing the martial arts legend Gen is far too young (the same actor played Liu Kang in Mortal Kombat!). For the fearsome clawed killer Vega, we get the hispanic guy from the Black Eyed Peas... ugh. The real reason this movie features on the list is the absolutely all time awful performance from Chris Klein as Charlie Nash. Klein's characterization features the worst acting (being hammy yet bland all at once) from a 'name' actor that I've ever seen in a major motion picture. Since he's only a supporting character, that saves this flick from the worst of the year.


3. All About Steve

Oscar award winning Sandra Bullock has been irritating and annoying before, but her performance of a shrill, stalkerish, obsessive crossword puzzle writer takes the cake for her worst career performance (I was wishing for her burping FBI agent from Miss Congeniality about twenty minutes in). Also starring the amazingly bland Bradley Cooper, this movie has three terminal flaws.
strike 1 bad acting
strike 2 bad plot
strike 3 bad writing.
The only thing that saves movie from being the worst of the year is the costarring tandem of Thomas Haden Church and Ken Jeong as an arrogant news anchor and a suffering camera tech. These two are trying to bring the funny into a painfully unfunny script, they have all the best lines (some of which have to be improvised) and make their part of the movie tolerable. Unfortunately, the movie is focused on a creepy Bullock-Cooper "romance" which makes the final project abysmal. I'll put it this way, when Bullock falls down a gaping hole (the only good physical joke and ruined in the preview) I was hoping for her death or at least serious bone breaking injury. Instead, I got another half hour of movie... ughhhh.

2. The Unborn

Out of the 2 Un movies released in early 2009 along with the Uninivited, this movie is everything that's wrong with most American horror. Using a combination of really cheap boo scares along with cheap rip offs of prominent horror movies like the Exorcist, the Grudge, and others does not scary make. The really sad thing about this one isn't the cool looking trailer, the waste of talent of David Goyer (who wrote Dark Knight, Blade, and Dark City), or a slumming Gary Oldman. The sad thing is that the movie is only PG-13, depriving it of the gore or nudity it would need to be at least entertaining (like the My Bloody Valentine remake).

1. Bride Wars

This might be one of the least funny comedies I've ever seen. It makes chick flicks look bad by being an offensive farce involving two lifelong friends who sabotage and destroy each others lives (using methods that might have been funny in Saved by the Bell) because their weddings get accidentally booked on the same day. Given the current 'bridezilla,' over competitive weddings of today, I truly believe that a script with good comic potential exists. Furthermore, you get a completely cheap "happy ending" because one of the male characters makes a script based decision to question the stupidity of the movie's plot. Anne Hathaway should have known better, Kate Hudson's agent needs a career change (Fool's Gold looked like an Oscar contender compared to this). Just amazingly unfunny, cliched, and completely devoid of any entertainment value whatsoever.