5 Bad Horror Movies That Made Money

The story in horror from the last 50 or so years has essentially been to make a movie for as little as possible and make as much money as humanly possible. Since Hollywood is funneling a lot of money into these movies that they are constantly putting out, it is a gauge of a film’s success by how much money they make. Yes, we are all aware that making movies is a business and a good number of today’s studio fare are pretty much aimed at cashing in on opening weekend then sharply dropping off. Want I want to talk about today though is the big budget, high rolling pieces of garbage. These are the studio backed horror films that were either pushed with large marketing campaigns or had inflated budgets. These are the films where we look back in time and say “really”? “That many people went and saw that”? The list itself is pretty impossible to compile considering on what people classify as “horror” but nevertheless, the following five films are a great example of how by using hype, movies can play well out of their league. (All grosses are Worldwide and according to Boxofficemojo.com, oh yeah and if you give a damn about any of these movies, spoiler warning)

What Lies Beneath (Dir: Robert Zemeckis) Take: $291,420,351: I don’t really want to officially go on record saying that What Lies Beneath was an absolutely terrible movie because in all honesty it wasn’t. Unfortunately though, the film is a perfect argument for the power and clout a star can have on the viewing public. I think it’s safe to say that there are three reasons the movie made any kind of money at all. They are as follows: Harrison Ford’s name was on the poster, Michelle Pfeiffer’s name is on the poster, and it wasn’t rated R. It was a perfect mix of creepiness for the teens, two older and established film stars, and anyone could get into the theater. The perfect Hollywood ingredients for a safe and balls-less movie that takes absolutely no risks and generically dumbs down and simplifies a genre that is capable of so much more. Bravo.

The Ring (Dir: Gore Verbinski) Take: $249,348,933 I realize that a lot of people really like this movie and even go as far as to say that it’s one of the best horror movies in the last 20 years. I can’t get behind that what so ever. I will admit that the story is pretty interesting whereas after you watch a creepy VHS bootleg of random images, you then die a week later. Of course, no one who worked on this movie ever came up with that story but that’s beside the point. The only thing the movie has going for it is some solid acting and relatively good pacing (which falls apart at the end). The movie thrives on a series of creepy images. The atmosphere created is a thinly veiled layer that is taking a pompous stance as a ghost story with more substance. Sad truth is that it isn’t. It’s a watered down PG-13 thriller with nothing original about it.

The Grudge (Dir: Takashi Shimizu) 2004 Take: $187,281,115 Ah another remake from the East! Much like I just said about The Ring, The Grudge did the exactly the same thing by making a studio friendly movie that doesn’t offend anybody and at the same time provids some creepy moments and cheap thrills. How bout we just go down the essential horror movie checklist?

Creepy Children: check
Dark and hidden Family Past: check
Beautiful Girl out of her element: check
Weird-camera-shutter-thing-that-makes-creatures-move-all-creepy: check

Bad characterization, a convoluted and nonsensical plot, and old genre tricks make this one you should all just skip. Actually, now that I think about it, all we need is an old person to tell the main character that “you’re doomed” and I think you’ll have Bingo. Or you know see the original which is actually a “new concept” and “good”.

Anaconda (Dir: Luis Llosa) 1997 Take: $136,885,767: Since its release 12 years ago we’ve all had some time to catch this movie on cable and in turn really let it digest in our consciousness. The result is a barrage of unintentional hilarity mixed with a terrible CGI snake, some worse acting, and essentially the definition of the word “schlock”. This one has been regaled for its absolute ridiculousness and scenery chomping performance by Jon Voight as well as just an overall smell of garbage cheese. This movie is straight up terrible but it still went on to gross over 136 million dollars! If someone or anyone has any idea how that happened, please let me know. The movie is a little bit of a guilty pleasure of mine, but for all you normal people this movie should only be viewed as a catalyst for a drinking game.

I Am Legend (Dir: Francis Lawrence) Take: $585,349,010: This one is too easy to really come down on. We’ve all seen it, and although there may be a few moments of a good film sticking its head through the cracks, once the bad CGI vampires show up it’s all over. There is no coming back from that. Now that we are all agreed, what I want to know is, why doesn’t anyone just shoot the short story by Richard Matheson? We have now had 3 film versions and only the Vincent Price version (The Last Man on Earth) was even remotely close (but the Omega Man wins for awesomeness). The short story is absolutely amazing and I really have no idea why anyone would change a single element of it. The whole point of the story is that the last man alive IS THE LEGEND. The vampires see him as a legend because he kills so damn many of them. Why does everyone forget that!! IT’S THE FRAKKIN’ TITLE!!!!! I need to sit down, I’m getting a headache.

While I recuperate, I would love to hear everyone’s thoughts on the subject. Is there any movie I may have missed? Do you want to flame me because I pointed out that The Ring was terrible? Well either way let me hear about it!