Things

I have only this to say: You may not remember what happened in this film, (or you may TRY to forget) but you will never forget the experience of watching it. Trust me on this. It is BEYOND bad. Are you listening? BEYOND bad...

This is it my friend. When you haunt video stores in the hope of finding the worst movies ever made you can stumble across all types of elements that can make a movie terrible but 'things' managed to combine them all to produce a film that is so bad that it totally represents the bottom of the cinematic barrel.

1.Bad special effects. Check. The mutant ants (which seem to number in the dozens despite the tiny belly that they erupted from) in some scenes seem to be filled with green slime and in others, paper mache.

2.Bad dialog. Check. This is one of those movie where everyone seems compelled to make noise no matter what they are doing. My favorite scene involves a man looking through cupboards and saying "Hummm" as he opens each one.

3.Fully dressed Porn star. Check. Porn star and club owner Amber Lynne shows up as a reporter who spends the entire movie sitting on a chair and reading off cue cards. The remarkable thing is that in one of her first mainstream films, the set she is on has lower production values than any porn she had appeared in.

4.Referrences to better movies. Check. The biggest mistake a bad movie can make is reminding the audience of much better films and "Things" seem to revel is discussing movies like "Evil Dead" and comments about "last house on the left"

I could go on but the point has already been made. Of all the movies I have seen in my life this may actually be the worst. I know negative reviews will often cause people to seek out certain films but let me just say, watch at your own risk.

I consider myself to be a bad film connisseur, but this movie is THE worst EVER!!! It's a badly made Canadian giant bug film, with even worse footage of former porno queen Amber Lynn edited between scenes as a reporter, reporting on things unassociated with this movie. Its a partial rip off of Evil Dead and Last House on Dead End Street, but without the charm of either. Watch at own risk,eh.

Where to begin? I have also seen what I thought was the worst horror movie ever made, that being "Night of Horror", but then I saw "Things" and everything changed.

There is no doubt about it, Things is easily the worst horror movie ever made. It could also be the worst movie ever made. I have no idea how something this bad could end up on VHS and then on DVD years later. I can safely say I don't think we will ever see a bluray release. There's really no point haha.

As much as I thought this movie sucked, I have to admit I loved watching most of it. The stuff between brothers Don and Doug is so bad it's awesome.

Things makes little sense, features Amber Lynn in a totally throw away non-nude part(boo!), has terrible effects/lighting/audio and contains the worst acting known to man.

I give it a 1/10 but also say it's a must see for anyone who loves bad horror flicks.

I typically rate movies on personal grading system:

(How enjoyable it was) + (How well it accomplished what the Director attempted to do) = Final Rating

Now...for the first part, it's pretty simple. Did I like it? Was it enjoyable? Would I watch it again? This means lots of different things, as some movies are hard to watch due to their content but are nonetheless enjoyable and well made (well made being more the second part).

The second part is much more subjective. It's easy to discuss differences between a blockbuster Hollywood production and a straight-up indie film w/ limited budget and fx. It's much more difficult to determine when it's a film made for the purpose of being bad. Some films completely miss the mark by taking themselves too seriously (ie making a seriously crappy film but believing it is true cinema). Then there are films like Plan 9, or Things, which are made with the express purpose of being bad. And when I say bad, I mean, like, REALLY BAD. Like, SO BAD that the viewer questions how any sane person could make a film. When it comes to Things, that exact scenario is what we are met with- it's a bad...REALLY bad...and intentionally so. That said, the film accomplished exactly what the director set out to do, so how can it be anything other than "very good?" Serious film elitists will look at 'Things' but rare it based on comparing it to other films. How can one of the trashiest films in history be graded under such rubric? The answer...it can't.

Therefore, when I aggregate the scores, the film is DEFINITELY either a 1 or a 10. It is disgustingly bad...horrible...a travesty of a waste of the Super 8 it was shot on...despicable. But amazingly achieved in each way.

If you're looking for a serious film to get in to, this is not the one for you. It is a '1.' If you're looking for a filthy piece of trash that is offensive to you as human and steals 90 or so minutes of your life, and offering absolutely ZERO redeeming value, then this is your '10.' If you don't know which category you would fall under, then assume it's a '1' and skip it. If you believe you might fall in to the latter, then here is your '10.' The caveat is that you will not get back the 90 minutes of your life you spent on this, so consider it dead to you.