I can't help but agree with their assessment of the most recent Star Wars film.

Derf | January 08, 02:51 CET

Well, I can't really comment on the third Star Wars film because I gave up after the first quarter of the second one. but I'll take your word for it derf.

Anyway, it's good to see Serenity made it to the list without
major Browncoat involvement.

beans | January 08, 03:11 CET

The great thing about that worst film's page is that beneath each movie blurb is a "buy dvd" link. Hello, this movie is awful, would you like to purchase it?

MySerenity | January 08, 03:13 CET

Maybe the same reason you just have to touch something with a 'Wet Paint' sign on it ? ;)

Saje | January 08, 04:36 CET

MySerenity - they are using Amazon affliate codes for all the "buy dvd" links, which means money to them...

To clarify this one - Channel 4's vote counting wasn't mentioned on the US browncoat site, .org, Fireflyfans, UK Browncoats, Usenet or anywhere else I saw. It went ahead entirely without the interweb fans.

I'm very proud (?) Serenity took 3rd place from the collective concious of the British public with this one. Something like 'Star Wars' took the dollars. "Serenity" didn't take the dollars so much (more of the pounds, actually) but it was a film those who saw it rememebered well, clearly.

gossi | January 08, 04:39 CET

I agree, gossi. Box office blockbuster does not automaticly equal quality entertainment. Revenge of the Sith is not even in the same league with Serenity in terms of script, acting, character development, and directing.

I think the average American movie goer, which I am one, could take a page or two from the Brits when it comes to recognizing quality entertainment IMHO.

haven | January 08, 05:22 CET

Gotta love the Brits. They seem to have much better taste then us idiot Americans. Have to absolutely agree about Star Wars Episode 3. Would have got up and left the theater if my dad and brother weren't there.

flightofserenity | January 08, 05:47 CET

Star Wars Episode 3 wasn't as great as all the American reviewers made it sound, but nowhere near the worst film of the year.

vampire dan | January 08, 07:15 CET

I can't imagine Revenge of the Sith was the very worst film of this, or any, year. I imagine its ranking here was a reflection of (a) the disappointment felt by those - such as I - who still harbor fond feelings about the franchise, and fervently hoped it would be a satisfying final installment, and (b) a reaction against the hype. We Brits still enjoy a wee bit of taking down the great and the powerful.

But no, not literally the worst of the year.

SoddingNancyTribe | January 08, 08:16 CET

Revenge of the Sith is the worst film of the year while Goblet of Fire is the best?

Yeah, right.

The Dark Shape | January 08, 08:45 CET

Yikes, it almost hurts Serenity's credibility to be ranked under Goblet of Fire (gahhh, I loved the first three, but Mike Newell really fucked things up, it was like a friggin' slideshow of a sketchy premise for a rough draft of the script).

And, though I know there were those that were strongly disappointed with Revenge of the Sith, but worst movie of the year? That's...extreme. More than extreme. I can't believe the British people actually liked House of Wax better. I loved ROTS, and while I can certainly understand the complaints that others had for it, it is hardly the worst film of 2005.

For the record, the worst is The Pacifier.

UnpluggedCrazy | January 08, 13:20 CET

Very cool. I have high hopes for the UK DVD release then.

Simon | January 08, 13:53 CET

Reviews of Harry Potter in the UK have mostly been positive to very positive. I haven't actually seen a bad review for it, thinking about it.

I'd like to apologise to The Dark Shape for the way the British public apparently didn't agree with him. ;)

gossi | January 08, 14:21 CET

Well, gossi, it's not that Goblet of Fire is a bad movie, per se, it's just the fact that it is so much less than what it could've been (and what the first three, especially the amazing third, were). If you check in the Film forum over at Whedonesque.org, I suggested an alternative title be Harry Potter and the Most Disappointing Movie Ever Made.

I think Owen Gleiberman in Entertainment Weekly put it best, describing the film as being jammed together like LEGO blocks with no kind of emotional or structural flow.

[ edited by UnpluggedCrazy on 2006-01-08 12:31 ]

UnpluggedCrazy | January 08, 14:30 CET

Woo, I'm so glad my little film is so popular in my little country.

flugufrelsarinn | January 08, 17:39 CET

>>Reviews of Harry Potter in the UK have mostly been positive to very positive. I haven't actually seen a bad review for it, thinking about it.<<

How good is your German, Gossi? Want to see mine? *g*

I must say I liked that list, too -- until I saw who'd won. Okay, this was the first HARRY POTTER film directed by a Brit, which is maybe a nice thing if you are a Brit ... but the film was my close runner-up to EPISODE III as the most-mind-boggling-(considering the resources these people had, d@mmit)-let-down of the year.

bschnell | January 08, 18:35 CET

I don't know what everyone finds so bad about Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Maybe you're all comparing it to the fourth book, which is kind of unfair seeing as books are nearly always better than movies. I haven't read the fourth book for along time and I really enjoyed the fourth movie, more than any of the others.

As for Star Wars, I think the problem is that most people compare the original three to the new three. If you try to watch the first three movies on their own, you'll see that they're enjoyable adventure stories that were actually pretty well thought out, even if the acting and writing sucks.

vampire dan | January 08, 19:53 CET

I actually saw all 3 of the Star Wars prequels before I'd seen the later 3 (eps 4 5 and 6).

And you know what? I thought they were terrible. I actually made a comment to a friend (a Star Wars loving friend, too) that'd I'd rather wipe my arse with the scripts for Eps 1 to 3 than read them.

So, I went and got the box set for the Ep 4-6 trilogy on DVD. Why? I wanted to see why it got popular. And the answer is easy - episodes 4 and 5. They're really freakin' cool. I mean, Millenium Falcon, hello.

If Joss ever pitches a Serenity prequel in 20 years time, I'll disown him. Not that I own him. But still - please don't. Magic hits occasionally in TV and film, but it's not easy to recreate.

[ edited by gossi on 2006-01-09 00:23 ]

gossi | January 09, 02:22 CET

I thought that the latest HP film was the strongest of the lot and the book was not my favourite so far. So clearly, there are some differences of opinions.
And Joss can pitch a prequel in 20 years if it means we get 2 more films now.

Lioness | January 09, 02:57 CET

I'd like to apologize to gossi for the British community's taste in film ;)

(kidding!)

The Dark Shape | January 09, 04:45 CET

Edited because I suddenly realized that bashing Ep. III yet again was kind of silly -- if also kind of fun.

[ edited by bobster on 2006-01-09 05:27 ]

bobster | January 09, 07:26 CET