Bad Movie Classification System: Part Three

On to the Category III bad movie. Now we’re cooking with gas! While it is possible to endure the Category I, possible to find perverse enjoyment in the Category II, the Category III takes things to the next level: it’s the movie that is too painful to watch under any circumstances.

  • Type: Category III
  • Also known as: the “walk out of the theater” movie
  • Example: Ultraviolet
  • Circumstances for watching: you have advanced amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and you’ve managed to really piss off your caretakers

It’s easy to differentiate Category IIIs from Category IIs: if there exists some mental state where you might find amusement watching the movie, it’s a Category II. By definition, watching a Category III is a joyless experience.

But differentiating the Category III from the Category I is trickier. The typical Category III might at first appear to be a Category I, but soon the realization dawns that the movie is not just mediocre or bad in all aspects, but so awful across the board that all the bad stuff must have been done on purpose. Just having, say, awful acting is not enough — the movie needs to utterly fail on all levels.[1] If you’re having trouble telling the difference, the Category III rule of thumb is that the Category I stems from laziness, incompetence, or cynicism, while the Category III stems from sheer malice. This rule breaks down for some special cases (mentioned below), but in general, if the filmmaker doesn’t care about the audience, it’s a Category I; if the filmmaker clearly hates the audience, it’s a Category III.

One easy path to Category III status is to create an adaptation that desecrates its source subject. The bonus points accrued for destroying something the audience loves are often enough to push a movie over the Category III line. For example, director Uwe Boll‘s films usually earn Category III status in no small part due to the hatred he induces in the video gamer community. (It’s okay video gamers, Uwe hates you right back.) Another example would be the infamous Ralph Bakshi’s Lord of the Rings, Part One — ordinarily a solid Category I, but for many Tolkien fans, an atrocity. Interestingly, Bakshi’s film violates our rule of thumb about Category IIIs and malice: as far as I know, Bakshi didn’t necessarily hate his audience or subject matter, he just ran out of money. (Although the wretchedness of his film is hard to explain by just that.) Likewise, Courtney Solomon doesn’t hate his fellow roleplaying game enthusiasts — it’s just that his film makes it appear that he does.

Next time, we cover the last and most complex case, the Category IV. Don’t miss it! Errr, that is, don’t miss the journal entry. The movies, eh, those you can miss.

1. Although I suppose there is the theoretical possibility of a Category III having only one or two bad characteristics. For example, there might be a movie out there where the awful soundtrack or motion-sickness-inducing camera work is enough. Suggestions for candidates welcome!

8 thoughts on “Bad Movie Classification System: Part Three

  1. Uwe Boll is offering to fight people that don’t like his movies?! I will set aside my atheism briefly and pray that Paul Verhoeven does the same.

    Dear God, this is your chance to reel me in and make the world a better place at the same time. World Peace is for sissies, but a chance to get some ring time with a Hollywood hack seems a much more subtle and elegant way to show Your Providence. In nomine patris, *mumble mumble*, *mumble mumble*, Amen.

  2. I think the best explanation of the awfulness of the Bakshi LotR is that, well, he’s Ralph Bakshi. All of his films are vile. Even Wizards, which with perseverance and a drunken appreciation of the cartoon softcore, you might think you could elevate to Category II, turns out, through its interminable Bakshittiness, to be a clear III.

  3. Al of Ralph Bakshi’s films are vile?

    Have you even WATCHED “American Pop” or “Fire and Ice”?

  4. ALL of Ralph Bakshi’s films are vile?

    Have you even WATCHED “American Pop” or “Fire and Ice”? What do you know about the most influential animator of the latter half of the twentieth century?

    My God, even watch “Heavy Traffic”. The guy’s bloody brilliant!

  5. “Starship Troopers,” which you mentioned under “Category I,” fits under your “Category III” because it “desecrates source material.” It was not until fairly recently that I found out that, actually, Verhoeven had planned to make a totally different movie about interstellar infantry, and wound up buying the rights to the novel JUST TO AVOID A LAWSUIT BASED ON VERY SUPERFICIAL SIMILARITY.

    In other words, he desecrated the original material for practically no reason at all (based on what I understood, the similarity between Verhoeven’s idea and SST was VERY superficial).

    What’s that, a Category 3.5?

  6. Oh yikes, I didn’t know that. My friend Sam above felt pretty strongly that *Starship Troopers* was a Category III for the “desecration” reason as well. I think you guys may well be right.

  7. Jordon.

    Starship Troopers was somewhat fun, though stupid.

    Yes, they desecrated the material.

    Yes. The book is much better (isn’t that usually the case?).

    With any luck, there may be an update to the film that’s more true to the source.

    I hear they’re making an Ender’s Game movie. Let’s see how they screw that one up.

    By the way… If there’s some way I can e-mail you, just let me know. I’d like to talk further.

  8. Jordon.

    Starship Troopers was somewhat fun, though stupid.

    Yes, they desecrated the material.

    Yes. The book is much better (isn’t that usually the case?).

    With any luck, there may be an update to the film that’s more true to the source.

    I hear they’re making an Ender’s Game movie. Let’s see how they screw that one up.

    By the way… If there’s some way I can e-mail you, just let me know. I’d like to talk further.

Comments are closed.