Top 10 WORST Films of 2018: Part 1 (#10-6)

As the 2019 film season begins, it’s time to once again reflect upon on the year prior to rank the best and worst from the past twelve months. But unlike a lot of people on the internet, I do things a little differently around here by doing the ‘Worst of the Year’ list first BEFORE the ‘Best of the Year’ list. The reason why I do this is simple; why the heck would I want to end the year on a bad note by talking about the worst films that I’ve seen? Now with that said, I’m fully aware that the annual ‘Worst of’ lists always get greater attention online because the internet loves to see people rag on the worst films of the year. But as you might have guessed, I’m just not one of those people. Even in cases where I don’t have particularly high expectations for a film, I always go into every new film that I see hoping for the best because, if you ask me, that’s exactly what a film fan should be. Obviously, though, there will be times where you’ll come across a film that just didn’t work for you, and that’s perfectly okay because film is a subjective medium. As such, do not go into these next two posts expecting any sort of intense rants on the films that will be appearing on this list because I find that I tend not to get that angry anymore when it comes to films that I don’t really like. It’s a lot like a recent situation that actor John Krasinski was in when he met with director Paul Thomas Anderson, who suggested that the word ‘hate’ is too strong a word to use when talking about film, a mindset that I certainly agree with. However, don’t assume that this means that I will be ‘going soft’ on these films as I still intend on addressing their various shortcomings. It’s also worth noting that while I will be delving into a few spoilers here and there, Spoiler Warnings will not be put into effect given that this is the ‘Worst of’ list. Thus, without further ado, it’s time to cover my Top 10 Worst Films of 2018, starting with films #10-6. Before we begin, however, there is one Dishonorable Mention… 

DISHONORABLE MENTION: TOMB RAIDER

When I first reviewed this film back in March, I gave it a 3/5 rating and noted that while it wouldn’t be the one to break the dreaded curse of poorly-received film adaptations of popular video games, at the very least it was one of the genre’s better outings. But while I do still stand by that specific argument, this ultimately became one of the rare instances where my initial opinion of the film changed considerably as time went on. Now to the film’s credit, when it does get into its big action set-pieces, these sequences are well-handled and do a nice job of replicating the thrills of some of the most standout moments of the recent Tomb Raider video games. However, these only occur during the second half of a film that suffers from an extremely slow opening that takes its sweet time when it comes to getting Lara on the mystical island of Yamatai. And even after that, it still runs on a basic ‘origin’ plot that primarily focuses on Lara’s relationship with her long-lost father Richard. Sure, there is some decent emotional depth to come from this, especially once Lara learns that her father is still alive. At the same time, though, the film would’ve benefitted more by adding in some of the characters and plotlines from the 2013 Tomb Raider game, including Lara’s best friend Sam and the other crew members who were on the same ship that Lara was on before she got stranded on Yamatai. It’s a shame, really, because despite some of the pre-release skepticism that revolved around her casting, Alicia Vikander does give it her all as Lara Croft. Unfortunately, though, the film just doesn’t match her commitment to the part. Still, compared to other films in the genre, this one at least tried.

And now we move on to the Top 10, which is always started off by films that I was generally ‘on the fence’ about. In other words, these are the films that were far from being the worst of the year but weren’t necessarily that good, either. And at Number 10, we have a prime example of this in a film that I feel rather bad about when it comes to putting it on here as it was made by a very talented filmmaker. Sadly, though, this was ultimately an underwhelming take on its iconic source material, especially when compared to its Disney counterpart.

10. MOWGLI: LEGEND OF THE JUNGLE

In the early 2010’s, two different live-action adaptations of author Rudyard Kipling’s classic novel The Jungle Book were put into production. The first of these to come out came in 2016 via Disney and director Jon Favreau’s remake of the studio’s 1967 animated classic. However, instead of just being a straight-forward remake of the original film, Favreau combined elements from both the film and the novel to give it its own unique identity. And upon its release, the film was a massive critical and commercial success, grossing over $966 million worldwide and still standing as the most critically-acclaimed installment of Disney’s recent line of live-action remakes. As such, I think it’s safe to say that the success of Favreau’s film ended up having a huge effect on the other live-action adaptation of The Jungle Book that was being developed by Warner Bros and directed by motion-capture icon Andy Serkis. For his adaptation, Serkis promised that it would be a darker and more faithful take on the source material. In other words, there weren’t going to be any musical numbers and the film wouldn’t shy away from the gruesome results of attacks made by either Shere Kahn or a human hunter. However, while the film was initially slated for an October 2018 release date, its theatrical release was ultimately canned when Warner Bros. sold the rights to Netflix, who premiered it online in December. This was reportedly done because Warner Bros feared that the film wouldn’t do so well in theaters. And yet, regardless of how it got released, something about it feels unfinished.

To be clear, the film’s darker tone isn’t its biggest issue. Even when you factor in a sequence where Mowgli comes across the decapitated head of his wolf friend Bhoot (yes, seriously…) and the occasional awkward tonal shift, it does let the film differentiate itself from previous adaptations. Plus, it does do a decent job of setting up Mowgli’s traditional arc of overcoming his status as an ‘outsider’ in the eyes of his jungle brethren, especially through the importance of him having to pass a trial known as ‘the Running’ so that he can officially join the wolf pack. However, once the film sends Mowgli to the man-village, this is where things start to get quite problematic in terms of the writing. Mowgli’s time in the man-village only takes up a small part of the run-time, and the addition of a secondary villain in hunter John Lockwood negatively affects the plot to the point where the notorious Shere Kahn ends up getting severely undermined as an antagonist. And if that wasn’t enough, these two villains are then dealt with quickly in an extremely abrupt and lackluster finale. Ultimately, though, the most disappointing aspect of the film… is that the visual effects aren’t that good. Sure, as one can expect from an Andy Serkis production, the film’s motion-capture effects are generally solid. Unlike Favreau’s film, the use of mo-cap is a lot more prominent to the point where the facial features of the actors playing the primary animal characters are easily recognizable. And yet, this film’s mo-cap work ends up paling in comparison to the effects of the Middle-Earth films and the recent Planet of the Apes films. The film’s CG jungle landscapes are even more lackluster, especially when compared to sequences that were shot on location in South Africa. In conclusion, this film at least deserves credit for its ambition. Despite its narrative flaws, Andy Serkis’ direction is solid and the film sports an excellent cast headlined by Christian Bale as the noble Bagheera, Serkis himself as a far gruffer take on Baloo, and Cate Blanchett as Kaa who, unlike the Disney films, is more in line with the novel by being one of Mowgli’s mentors instead of an antagonist. However, while I’ve tried not to frequently compare this one to the Jon Favreau-directed Disney flick, Mowgli: Legend of the Jungle ultimately lacks the visual polish and heart of its Disney counterpart.  

As fate would have it, Number 9 is also a film that was originally intended for a theatrical release before being abandoned by its studio and sold off to Netflix, and this one is even more disappointing compared to Mowgli because it comes from a franchise with a lot of potential.

9. THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX

After years of speculation, a sequel to the 2008 found footage monster flick Cloverfield finally hit theaters in 2016. However, this was not an ordinary sequel. Instead, 10 Cloverfield Lane was a Hitchcockian thriller that was pitched as a ‘spiritual sequel’ to its predecessor after producer J.J. Abrams’ production company Bad Robot reworked a spec script titled The Cellar to connect it to Cloverfield. Upon its release, the film was a solid critical and commercial hit, showcasing the franchise’s newfound potential as an anthology series a la The Twilight Zone. And later that year, another Bad Robot film, then titled God Particle, was confirmed to be the third installment of the franchise. A release date was confirmed for October 2017… before things started to get a lot more complicated. In July of that year, it was announced that the film would be pushed back to February 2018 for undisclosed reasons. In January 2018, the film was pushed back again, this time to April 2018. Once again, no explanation was given for the delay, and just like any J.J. Abrams production, details about the film were minimal to the point where these release date shifts were literally the only bits of news about them. The film continued to remain a secret until February 4^th, 2018, when its first promo was aired during Super Bowl LII. The film was officially renamed The Cloverfield Paradox and it was revealed that it would be debuting on Netflix. The biggest surprise, though, was that the film would premiere that very night after the game. Ultimately, though, this bold marketing strategy was better than the film itself.

Like Universal’s recent remake of The Mummy, this is a film that is clearly more focused on setting up the lore for its franchise rather than ensuring that its own story is solid. The ways in which the film connects to the previous Cloverfield films is fine, for the most part, mainly through the reveal that debris from the film’s main locale, the ‘Cloverfield Station’, was what crashed into the ocean at the end of the first Cloverfield. But as for the main plot itself… it’s just a clone of films like Alien and Sunshine where the crew of a space station find themselves being offed one by one by a mysterious force. Sure, this film does feature some effectively brutal kills, but the story is incredibly predictable and the characters are vastly underdeveloped, wasting a talented ensemble cast that includes Daniel Bruhl, Elizabeth Debicki, and David Oyelowo. One member of the cast does manage to get some decent material to work with, however, and that honor goes to Gugu Mbatha-Raw as main protagonist Ava Hamilton AKA the only character in the film to get any sort of character development through the reveal of a tragic incident where she lost both her kids in a house fire. In short, like Mowgli, it’s been made clear that this film’s fate as a Netflix release was because its studio (in this case, Paramount) wasn’t that confident in the final product. It has been reported that J.J. Abrams had planned on fixing the film in post-production, but he ultimately couldn’t do so due to his commitment to Star Wars: Episode IX. Still, regardless of how it would’ve turned out had J.J. been able to work on it as he had hoped, The Cloverfield Paradox is a sadly underwhelming installment of its promising franchise.

With Number 8, we have a genuine rarity in that this is quite arguably the first film produced under the Disney banner that’s appeared on my annual ‘Worst of’ lists. Usually Disney films end up on the other list, but as many of my peers have pointed out over the years, you won’t like every single film that’s made by your favorite studio.

8. THE NUTCRACKER AND THE FOUR REALMS

As I noted in my review for this film back in November, I didn’t necessarily ‘dislike’ this ambitious spin on the classic story of The Nutcracker as there are some genuinely good things about it, mainly in terms of its visuals. While it can be argued that this is another example of CGI overload like Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, the visual effects in this film are quite solid and they do succeed in bringing the bright and colorful world of the Four Realms to life, especially thanks to some solid cinematography by Damien Chazelle’s go-to DP Linus Sandgren. The film also has some solid performances from those who treat the material seriously, specifically Mackenzie Foy as main protagonist Clara, Helen Mirren as the ‘villainous’ Mother Ginger, and newcomer Jayden Fowora-Knight as the titular Nutcracker. However, this then ties into the film’s biggest issue in that it suffers heavily from severe tonal shifts. While the initial set-up for the story, specifically Clara learning more about her mother Marie’s past as the original ruler of the Four Realms, is treated seriously, almost all the sequences that take place within the Four Realms are incredibly over-the-top in nature. And because the film still tries to have a lot of serious moments over the course of its runtime, these two extremes frequently collide and, simply put, do not gel well. This is especially the case with the film’s biggest twist that revolves around the big reveal of its true main antagonist, the Sugar Plum Fairy.

Right from the get-go, Clara is led to believe that the Four Realms are in danger of being overtaken by Mother Ginger, ruler of the desolate Land of Amusements. To stop her, Clara is told of a special machine that can turn the Four Realms’ inhabitants into toys and vice versa, which is how her mother created the world in the first place. However, after Sugar Plum activates the machine and starts to amass an army of toy soldiers, it’s revealed that Mother Ginger wasn’t the sinister tyrant that she was made out to be. Instead, it’s Sugar Plum who plans on taking over the Four Realms as she blames Marie for abandoning them in favor of living the rest of her life with her family. Now while I’ll admit that I don’t have a lot of experience with The Nutcracker outside of a general awareness of it, I don’t think that I’ve ever come across a version of the story where the Sugar Plum Fairy is an antagonist. Granted, this could’ve worked in theory, but because the film has a short 99-minute runtime and a surprisingly brisk pace once Clara enters the Four Realms, this twist literally comes out of nowhere. To be fair, though, Keira Knightley does deserve some credit for, at the very least, committing to what is easily one of the weirdest performances in recent memory. In conclusion, this is another film that had quite an interesting production. While it was primarily directed by veteran filmmaker Lasse Hallstrom, fellow veteran director Joe Johnston supervised the film’s reshoots when Hallstrom became unavailable due to scheduling conflicts. And because Johnston’s contributions to the film proved to be quite substantial, he and Hallstrom ended up sharing the directorial credit in what is a genuine rarity when it comes to a production of this nature. At this time, there hasn’t been much info on what Johnston added to the film although it has been reported that he primarily buffed up the finale to make it ‘more exciting’. However, regardless of what he added to the final product, The Nutcracker and the Four Realms is an underwhelming take on its iconic source material. I mean, at the very least, it’s a harmless family flick, but at the same time, it’s still rather bland.

Say, remember back in May when I did a retrospective on The Dark Crystal and Labyrinth, the two non-Muppet films directed by Muppets creator Jim Henson? This was primarily done to honor the impending release of his company’s newest film… even though the film wasn’t set to come out until August. To be perfectly frank, the reason why the retrospective was done in May was so that I could have some new material published on this site during a time where the only other posts from that month were reviews of Deadpool 2 and Solo: A Star Wars Story. And then, if that wasn’t enough, I didn’t even end up seeing this new Henson production when it first came out. Having now seen it, it was probably for the best that I didn’t see it in theaters…

7. THE HAPPYTIME MURDERS

The Happytime Murders is a rare adult-oriented outing from the Jim Henson Company and was directed by Jim Henson’s son Brian, who also helmed the beloved Muppet Christmas Carol and the cult classic Muppet Treasure Island. The film focuses on a puppet ex-cop turned private investigator named Phil Phillips who investigates into a string of murders revolving around the cast of an old television sitcom that he has quite a history with. Like any Henson production, the main reason to watch this film is for its impressive puppetry work, as the filmmakers continue to do a great job when it comes to having their puppet characters seamlessly interact with humans. It’s a shame, then, that the story itself is incredibly predictable and goes through all the usual beats of a murder mystery plot, from a traumatic incident from the main character’s past that destroyed his career to a seductive femme fatale with ulterior motives. And while the film may tout itself as an R-rated comedy that’s ‘No Sesame, All Street’ (a tagline that literally got them sued by Sesame Street), it lacks the clever writing of other Henson productions, stranding a talented ensemble cast that includes Melissa McCarthy, Maya Rudolph, and Joel McHale. In short, it could be argued that this film’s shortcomings may have been due to it spending a few years in development hell. To put this all into perspective, I remember this film being announced around the time that the 2011 Muppets film was released, and to be perfectly blunt, this does feel like a film that didn’t necessarily evolve much from its initial story pitch.

To close out the first half of this year’s ‘Worst of’ list, we have a film that stars a talented actress and is directed by someone that she’s worked with to great success in the past. Sadly, though, their latest collaboration isn’t quite as good as their previous projects.

6. RED SPARROW

First off, let me make it clear that despite this being the second film of hers in a row to appear on my annual ‘Worst of’ list, I’m still a big fan of Jennifer Lawrence. Despite what I’ve said about last year’s disastrous biblical drama Mother and what I will be saying about this film, none of their shortcomings are her fault as she does give good performances in both. In this instance, she reunites with director Francis Lawrence (again, no relation) after they’d worked together on the last three Hunger Games films. F. Lawrence also brings in a lot of the same crew that they had worked with on those films, so at the very least, this film is well-shot and utilizes its wintry Russian setting to solid effect. Despite this, though, the film suffers from an incredibly slow pace that isn’t helped in the slightest by its hefty 140-minute run-time. And because of this, the film slogs through a very basic spy story that starts out fine enough but then ends up taking some major stumbles as the film goes on. While it has been reported that the ending was changed from its source material (author Jason Matthews’ 2013 novel of the same name) to give it more of a feminist angle, it’s still a generic finale in which the main protagonist makes a critical power move that allows her to get out of her predicament alive. In other words, this film’s a lot like 2017’s similarly-themed spy thriller Atomic Blonde but without the solid pacing. Granted, the dialogue-driven approach that this film takes over the genre’s usual action-oriented perspective is admirable, but it still could’ve benefitted from a few trims here and there as some scenes and plotlines feel quite extraneous. Thus, despite the best efforts of Jennifer Lawrence and a supporting cast that includes Joel Edgerton, Jeremy Irons, and Charlotte Rampling, Red Sparrow is a spy thriller that thoroughly lacks the ‘wow factor’ of the genre’s most iconic films.

And that concludes Part 1 of Rhode Island Movie Corner’s list of my Top 10 Worst Films of 2018. Thanks for following along and be sure to check back in tomorrow for Part 2 of this list, where I’ll be revealing the Top 5.

The Cloverfield Paradox (2018) review

In January 2008, audiences were treated to a new sci-fi monster flick known as Cloverfield. Produced by ‘franchise savior’ J.J. Abrams, written by Joss Whedon veteran Drew Goddard, and directed by ‘pre-Planet of the Apes’ Matt Reeves, the film was a major critical/commercial hit while also proving to be somewhat of a landmark entry in the ‘found footage’ genre. After that, though, it was unclear for a while if there would be a follow-up despite Abrams, Goddard, and Reeves all claiming that they were planning on making one. It wasn’t until 2016 when audiences learned that the series was set to continue, as 10 Cloverfield Lane was announced just two months prior to its March 2016 release. But despite this short time-span between its initial announcement and release, the film was another major critical/commercial hit that effectively paved the way for a fascinating new franchise that was intent on being reminiscent of the classic anthology series, The Twilight Zone. And now, this brings us to film #3 in the franchise, The Cloverfield Paradox. Initially named God Particle, this film was confirmed to be part of the Cloverfield franchise not long after 10 Cloverfield Lane’s release. However, the film’s initial fall 2017 release date ended up getting scrapped. Plus, like any major J.J. Abrams production, details about it were scarce for the following few months… that is, until this past Sunday when its first promo aired during the Super Bowl. Even more surprising, the promo revealed that the film would debut that very night on Netflix in lieu of a theatrical release. Thus, without further ado, let’s delve into the third installment of the Cloverfield franchise, which claims that it’ll uncover some backstory regarding the events of the original film that started it all.

In a not too distant future, the planet Earth is on the verge of a worldwide war due to an impending energy crisis. To fix this problem, all the major space programs of the world launch the Cloverfield Station, which is outfitted with a particle accelerator known as ‘the Shepard’ that will hopefully provide the planet with a new source of energy. However, the experiment ends up failing numerous times, resulting in the station’s crew being forced to prolong their stay up in space for at least two years as they must figure out why the Shepard keeps malfunctioning so that they can get it to work in time before a war breaks out back home on Earth. Eventually, the crew manages to achieve what appears to be a successful test, but in the process, they then find themselves in a troubling situation as the Earth mysteriously disappears from existence. This predicament is then further compounded by the unexpected arrival of a woman named Mina Jensen (Elizabeth Debicki), who claims to be a member of the crew and the best friend of crew member Ava Hamilton (Gugu-Mbatha Raw). In other words, the crew of Cloverfield Station soon come to realize that they’ve somehow ended up in an alternate dimension, which they must escape from before the damages to the station that were caused by the particle accelerator become too severe. Little do they know, though, that they must soon deal with the various dangers of this strange new world while, unbeknownst to them, the Earth of their dimension is dealing with a dangerous new threat of its own.  

While the potential was very much there for an interesting sci-fi story that further developed the universe of Cloverfield, this potential is ultimately wasted due to the film’s biggest issue of having a generally undercooked plot. Not only that, but it’s also quite derivative of several classic sci-fi films. Now I won’t be naming some of the biggest films that are clearly this film’s primary influences here because I fear that they would lead to some spoiler-y discussion about the events that happen in this film and I want to keep this review as spoiler-free as possible. Still, I’m 99.9% confident that you’ll know EXACTLY what films I’m talking about when you see this because, sadly, the similarities that The Cloverfield Paradox shares with those other sci-fi films are quite blatant. Now to the film’s credit, it does live up to its promise of delving into the mythos of its franchise, specifically by providing an answer to one of the key mysteries that was laid out in the ending of the original Cloverfield. Still, its attempts at connecting everything in the Cloverfield franchise ultimately feel just as underdeveloped as its main plot because it never really explores any of the story ideas that it introduces, especially the one that establishes the concept of alternate dimensions. And it’s a shame, really, because, from a technical perspective, the film is at least decently made. For a film that was originally meant to be released in IMAX but was ultimately relegated to being released on Netflix instead, it looks fine enough thanks to the solid cinematography from Bad Robot Productions regular Dan Mindel, who also did the cinematography for J.J. Abrams’ two Star Trek films and Star Wars: The Force Awakens. And just like the previous Cloverfield film, 10 Cloverfield Lane, this film sports an excellent score courtesy of the legendary Bear McCreary.

Alas, though, the various story issues of this film also end up affecting its cast of characters AKA the crew of Cloverfield Station. These characters are just as generic as the plot itself, with most of them getting little to no character development only to serve as a collection of stock horror film protagonists. Thankfully, this doesn’t apply to ‘all’ of them; specifically, Gugu Mbatha-Raw as main protagonist Ava Hamilton, who is easily the most well-developed character of the entire group. Obviously, that’s not really saying much given the lack of character development for everyone else but, to the film’s credit, her overall role in the story (which is all tied to an immensely devastating tragedy from her past) does yield its most effective moments of emotional poignancy. And this is only strengthened further by Mbatha-Raw’s excellent performance in the role; in other words, she’s easily the best part of the film. As for the rest of the cast, while they don’t get as much to work with by comparison, at the very least they’re all fine in their respective roles. Daniel Brühl is another major standout as Schmidt, who ends up being one of the more enigmatic members of the station’s crew, as is Chris O’Dowd as Mundy, who’s basically the film’s main ‘comic relief’ character. But again, without any decent bits of character development to work with, the two of them along with fellow co-stars David Oyelowo, John Ortiz, Zhang Ziyi, Aksel Hennie, and Elizabeth Debicki end up being just as stranded as their characters are in their current predicament.

From what I’ve read, it seems as if The Cloverfield Paradox’s fate as a Netflix release was due to Paramount, the franchise’s main studio, being uneasy about the final product and its potential profitability given its franchise-high budget of $45 million. J.J. Abrams himself was keen on trying to salvage the film in post-production but was ultimately unable to do so when he signed on to direct Star Wars: Episode IX. And overall, this does basically sum up this film in a nutshell. While it’s not outright ‘terrible’ (if anything, it’s not necessarily as bad as its abysmal 19% rating on Rotten Tomatoes suggests), it’s still a tragically underwhelming continuation of the Cloverfield franchise. Despite the potential for some interesting plot-lines, the film ultimately wastes them all due to its woefully generic sci-fi horror story that does little to further explore the franchise’s lore. This, in turn, wastes a perfectly good ensemble cast (save for Gugu Mbatha-Raw) that ends up being restricted to a bunch of stereotypical sci-fi horror roles. Ultimately, though, I will admit that I wasn’t ‘bored’ by this film at any point despite it being a clear hodge-podge of other films in its genre. Thus, if you are a fan of the Cloverfield franchise, then there’s a chance that you might like this film okay even if it’s nowhere near as good as its two predecessors. And despite this film’s disastrous critical reception, I don’t believe that this will be the end of the Cloverfield franchise. After all, there’s yet another Cloverfield film coming out later this year in October in the form of a WWII-set supernatural horror film called Overlord. Of course, it’ll probably get renamed soon so that it’ll have Cloverfield in the title, as was the case with 10 Cloverfield Lane (originally The Cellar) and this (originally God Particle). But thankfully, it’s been recently announced that it, along with other potential future installments of the franchise, will be theatrical releases instead of what happened here.

Rating: 2.5/5