MovieChat Forums > Gerry (2002) Discussion > Gerry is the Worst Movie of All Time

Gerry is the Worst Movie of All Time

posted 18 years ago by JephJohnson
204 replies | jump to latest

You may pontificate all you want of the merits and "hidden meanings" behind the movie "Gerry" because, I hate to break it to ya, all it was, was a ridiculously long and boring film where NOTHING HAPPENED!!! To give this film a rating above a 3 is beyond my comprehension. I am not hoping for a debate, I just wanted to voice an average thinking man's opinion...

I hate what most of Hollywood offers us these days, but c'mon people! Should anyone have to be subjected to nearly 2 hours of guys walking around the desert lost in the sand? I have not watched the DVD, but can only imagine what the directors and actors are saying in the commentary:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
MATT DAMON: Look Casey, here is the part where we were walking around in the desert.

CASEY AFFLECK: Hey Matt, remember this part? This is where we were walking around lost in the desert!

MATT DAMON: But Casey, wasn’t this the part where we walked around in the desert, lost? Or was it the part where we paused for a half-second while walking around the desert lost?

CASEY AFFLECK: Gus, didn't you direct us to walk "just a little faster" in this scene? Ha ha ha!

GUS VAN SANT: Yeah, that's right boys, this IS the scene where I told you to walk a little faster, but remember Casey, this is actually where you ad-libbed and walked at a slower speed! I was so mad, but ya know, in hindsight, you were right! I absolutely LOVED your ad-libbing! Matt, what do ya think of this next scene? This is where I filmed you actually passing the camera while walking around lost in the desert!!! Yeah, that’s right! I had the camera stationary and you and Casey walked passed it while being lost in the desert.

MATT DAMON: Watch this next scene carefully, or you might miss it…there is actually some sand that blows up from behind that hill.

GUS VAN SANT: Yep the wind was blowin’ at 20 miles per hour that day thanks to our special effects wizard Chris Burgoyne! Hey Chris what was your favorite part of this film?

CHRIS BURGOYNE: Well guys, I especially liked the part WHERE YOU DO NOTHING EXCEPT WALK AROUND THE DESERT LOST FOR TWO HOURS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The people who enjoy "Gerry" are the same people who would say Norman Rockwell was a terrible artist just because he made art expressing popular emotion. Rockwell was "pop" art before Warhol and as innovative (and certainly as talented) as Pollack. To be "beyond the norm" or "out of the mainstream" DOES NOT mean something is good. That said, I would like to defend avant-garde cinema. 80% of my favorite movies are Independently-made features. (The only premium movie channels we have on our cable TV are IFC and Sundance)...Gerry was simply an affront to my intelligence. My wife and I seriously thought it was some kind of joke Gus Van Sant was playing on the audience! Instead of walking out, we stayed to see if there just might be something that actually happened. Nothing did. The emperor wears no clothes and the Matrix also sucked!

Jeph Johnson

Oh, I liked "To Die For" so I am not a Van Sant "hater"

[–] mrs_ryanstiles 18 years ago

Amen. I came on this film's board to say just about the same thing you just typed. The movie had no underlying meaning, it barely had dialouge. It was just bad. What really got me was how they show the same shot for like ever. Oh and then one dies and it's over? what the hell?

4-14-05 Colin + Brad + Live + 100 mousetraps= AWESOME!

[–] xenodrone 18 years ago

Go watch something like House of the dead or sahara. In those movies theres plenty of expolions, shooting and sex to keep you entertained.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jar-jar-stinks 17 years ago

what an intelligent riposte

you must've have been on the school debating team

[–] whitemarkk7 8 years ago

I agree, literally my worst movie of all time. I've seen some movies on bottom 100 and this movie trumps every one of them. At least those other movies have dialogue and something happening instead of 2 people walking in a desert. People may think it'll make them look smart if they like this movie so they pretend like it's a masterpiece and people who don't like it are idiots. Well, you're the one who watched an entire movie of 2 guys walking in a desert and liked it. Ugh pure torture of a "film".

[–] rad25 16 years ago

Don't be a snob and admit that this film was a failed idea and a waste of celluloid

__________________________________
The straightest line between a short distance is two points.

[–] Revolutionow 16 years ago

You're the snob.

You commie-dupes come up with some weird fantasies about Pro-Victory Americans!

[–] drlecter9 15 years ago

and celluloid should never be wasted!!! please show some respect to all those cows that died for your flick, mr claus van santa

ps: i was good this year

"you ain't a has been if you never was"

[–] CocoaBeachFalcon 16 years ago

Actually, DA Hip Hop Witch is the worst movie ever made. But this certainly runs in the top 20

Last Movies Seen:
Hancock (6/10)
Wanted (4/10)
The Incredible Hulk (8/10)
Iron Man (9/10)

[–] whitekid76 15 years ago

r u nuts wanted was so good why only a four?

[–] mmattagirl 16 years ago

Sorry, Benn - you are in the minority here - Gerry is the most *beep* movie I have ever seen (and I've seen some, believe me) - In fact it was so slow it shouldn't come in the 'movie' category - it should be called a 'stilly'.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] chibilute 18 years ago

single one shots is a style. if you don't like it that's fine, but don't knock it. i actually prefer one shots as it lets the actors actually act and be real, and it doesn't have all the mindless cutting and close ups and all that junk, it's real film making.

what's wrong with having minimal dialogue? film making is a visual experience. if you want dialogue, why don't you watch television? seriously, do we need to be drowned in dialogue in order for a movie to be good? the lack of dialogue really set the mood. most people don't constantly talk and talk all the time, especially when they're lost and they know there's absolutely no hope.

[–] drum_stiks 18 years ago

"what's wrong with having minimal dialogue?"
--------------------------------------------
You don't need lots of speech to make a good movie, but there's minimal dialogue, and then there's ungodly-close to no dialogue. But there IS sand though. That was exciting. Oh, the death, that was intense. Hmmm...walking, there WAS walking. WAIT: HOW CAN I FORGET THE JUMP! I seriously was on the edge of my seat for THAT one. Also, the sand bed Damon made was a stroke of genius.

If you're not catching on, my post has an underlying concept called sarcasm. This film's underlying message? 'When you get lost in an open desert heading in one direction, turn around and go the opposite frikkin' direction, bring water, and don't climb 25 foot rocks that are incapable of climbing back down.'

[–] gargajl 17 years ago

This is exactly the point you are missing ...
Because it is so completely obvious that in a real-world situation the two men would have started walking in the opposite direction, you can only come to the conclusion that this movie is not SUPPOSED to be about two guys walking in a desert getting lost. It must have a meaning beyond what you just see. So you are incorrect - it does have an underlying concept or else GVZ wouldn't have made such an "illogical" movie.

I understand you may not want to look for that underlying message in a movie that you consider boring. That is certainly your right, but you dont exactly have the place to claim there IS no meaning or dissuade others for searching for it.

[–] jaredmillington 9 years ago

lol at this. You know people look hard enough and find miracles in their grilled cheese. Then they sell them on ebay for bank. If anyone looks hard enough at something they begin to see things that aren't there. Use all of humanity to reference as my point.

And there is a meaning. Don't get lost in the desert or you'll probably die. Ya got it thanks. That was pretty loud and clear I thought.

To most people it was a brutal watch. But to a select few it was a masterpiece.......

I can only laugh when I picture GVS reading posts explaining at how masterful it was the way GVS portrayed this and that, and the meanings behind it, only to watch him scratch his head and say........"they totally didn't get it. It was just a movie with pretty pictures and two awesome actors walking in the desert for a few hours because YOLO".

when someone shows a scanning picture of a mountain for 6 mins, they probably just want you to see the mountain cause hey it takes up 6 mins and who doesn't love mountains?

[–] ronnieaka 14 years ago

chibilute, you are goddamn right man

Yvaine: Let's see if you can work it out for youself. What do stars do?

[–] MorganFreemanSucks 16 years ago

amen

www.wiredown.com - reviews by Epileptic Peat

[–] koko83 18 years ago

I suppose its different tastes for different people. Like the little imaginary commentary you worked on, i didnt read it cos i thought it was stupid, like you thought the movie was stupid. Different tastes for different people.

[–] mrs_ryanstiles 18 years ago

I'm not trying to knock anyone's taste, each to their own ya know. I was just stating my opinion and agreement with the person who originally posted.

oh and btw House of The Dead and Shahara were just as bad as this, but for different reasons. But I digress.

4-14-05 Colin + Brad + Live + 100 mousetraps= AWESOME!

[–] motemeal 18 years ago

I actually agree with your opinion, and I typically like 'strange and obscure' films.

I had Battlefield Earth as my 'Worst Movie of All Time' right until I saw this. If there is some deeper meaning to the film, it's solely dependant on the viewer ascribing it to the movie.

[–] JephJohnson 17 years ago

You didn't read it because you thought it was stupid? Wow! At least I actually WATCHED "Gerry" to form my opinion!

[–] HoneyBronzeX 17 years ago

I, too, enjoy obscure and subtle types of films. I love the off-beat, quirky kind of intense looks into the human psyche, but as many others have posted, this movie left me thinking "Why?" The characters weren't interesting enough for me to want to invest time in the movie. It's taken me months to watch it in its entirety because I can't sit through it in one piece!

A person can understand the "meaning" of an "intellectual" piece of work and still not like it or think it was great to begin with. I get it, but I think it just sucked!

Russell Crowe is the exception, but Bobby Brown is the rule!?

[–] patrickhoop 18 years ago

No plot, badly improvised dialog, terrible acting and so much wasted time taken out of your life. This really is the worst movie I have ever seen. I want that part of my life back where I sat down to watch this total trash.

[–] chibilute 18 years ago

a movie doesn't need plot. if you want plot, go read a book.

[–] gulfcoastviper 18 years ago

Books don't need plots either, for all that.

[–] patrickhoop 18 years ago

this one could have done with one at least to keep the audience alive.

[–] gregorymarshalllewis 18 years ago

Wow for osmeone who hated the movie you sure spend alot of time writting about it - what the hell?

[–] maryjanextc420 18 years ago

Yeah what he said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[–] mrs_ryanstiles 18 years ago

A movie's messageboard is a place to discuss things about the movie, i.e if you liked it or not and to discuss why or why not with other viewers. So of course we talk about not liking it. Anyway, I like obscure strange movies too but this was just crap. And the sad part was the premiss of the movie was really good, this could have been a great idie flick. Oh and yeah I'm pretty sure movies have to have a plot or they're not movies, they're just reels of pointless film. I mean come on that was a pretty retarted statement. It's like film 101.

4-14-05 Colin + Brad + Live + 100 mousetraps= AWESOME!

[–] ObsoleteVernacular 18 years ago

this could have been a great idie flick

oh, so you're one of those
i cuda sworn it was a great film

Oh and yeah I'm pretty sure movies have to have a plot or they're not movies, they're just reels of pointless film.

soooo, who was it that told you this and the other RULES of film
did you go to Ron Howard film school?

Last Film I Watched:
Trainspotting - Danny Boyle(8/10)

[–] chibilute 18 years ago

oh. yeah. i guess it's like film 101.

fool.

[–] e-bowen2 16 years ago

Too many apathy these days. if you have any emotion at all, you might be captured by the genuine and heartfelt music that pretty much sets the tone for the entire movie. It's a tempo. The music is light and sad when things seem hopeless or sad, and it's dark and scary when the end seems near. I guess many of you average moviegoers can't see that. The music and cinematography are what makes this movie an overall success. Just look at the way the movie was shot. Yes, these 2 walk through a desert for two hours. And yet, the movie was so visually and musically stunning that it stands out in my mind. But some people are so "bored" because they aren't seeing violence or something similar that they can't appreciate truly beautiful things in a movie.

And I LOVE how there's always at least ONE person who says "This is the worst movie ever made" for ever film. And it's usually the great films that get treated like this by ignorant people.

Matthew Lillard for Carnage in Spider-Man 4!

[–] RaspberryWaffles 15 years ago

Great point, and you're very right that people are too ignorant. People are always looking for the next Star Wars or the next Departed, and they'll get it, oh yeah. But its movies like this, Brokeback Mountain, Last Days, and Memento that are overlooked by the people on this board. You look at these movies, go "wow, this should be unbelievable," watch it and say "nothing much happened, just a bunch of pointless drama, this sucks" then come here to bitch about it. And I'm sorry but that is just horribly *beep* immature and truly a person who knows nothing about movies illogical way of going about the fact that they are clearly unintelligent. Listen, sit down, watch this movie again, don't look at the obvious, look deeper. Listen to the score, watch the scenery, the depth of this movie doesn't come from Damon and Affleck like the rest of their films. Like Caine said in the Departed "you won't see it, because of course, you're not really looking." Watch this film again with a more open minded point of view, you can get it for friggin ten bucks at Borders, more than worth the sales price.

"She can't stand the sight of me. Now I see the funny side, now I'm always smiling!"

[–] nnickoloff1234-1 18 years ago

it was a joke considering other gus van sant films. he was simply joking. 100%

[–] mrs_ryanstiles 18 years ago

what a minute? So he made a crap-tastic film, got good actors (wait nevermind 2 mediocre actors) and film crew and spent money just for a joke? Wow. I need to get some of what Gus is smokin!

4-14-05 Colin + Brad + Live + 100 mousetraps= AWESOME!

[–] chasingdogma54 18 years ago

actualyl Gus describes this movie as something terrible. he always says hes trying to do the bad ideas of hollywood so no one else does(psycho) i gurantee this is one of those cases.

Why don't people watch GOOD tv anymore?

[–] Slippery_Jack 18 years ago

Saw some of Coyote Ugly on tv the other night --- now BY FAR my personal worst film of all time that I've seen (with The Fast and the Furious in second)

Though I really wanted to like Gerry (Elephant is one of my FAVE films of all time!), have to say I really think much of it in the end - loved the first half (nice to see REAL conversations in an American film) but kind of switched off as it wound down (but then I did make the mistake of watching it lying down) - was the opposite with Van Sant's Last Days, where I got more drawn in as it went on.

[–] aldaman212 18 years ago

This movie Gerry is kind of like virtual reality (thats how i look at it anyways) because these characters are lost in the DESERT!!! I think gus van sant was trying to make us feel what the characters would have felt, which is boredom and depression, maybe thats why your so bored with it, which also means that gus did his job.

Also Gerry is one of the BEST indies i've ever seen (next to Elephant)with, i think, the best score in years... And u really have to appreciate cinematography to really get into the movie.

And i thought that Last Days was Van Sant's worst, personnally

And then, Tyler was gone

[–] Slippery_Jack 18 years ago

I'm sure Van Sant would take offence in you stating that it was his intention to bore the pants of his audience lol ! ! ! Funny stuff . . .

And I agree on the excellent cinematography (my fave shot was the two heads bobbing in and out of synch along with the crunching underfoot) - just a shame the content wasn't up to much. Can't say I remember the score at all (maybe that means the composer did his job too eh?)

[–] band_aidman 18 years ago

I really hate the assuptions made that if you do not like Gerry, you are a philistine, a brute, a lowbrow. I was bored to tears watching Gerry, that does not mean my favourite movie is Spiderman 2 or Underworld 2 or something. I enjoy indie films greatly, I enjoy art films such as Eraserhead etc. I have nothing against the use of imagery to potray symbolism, but either cut it down to a reasonable lentgh, or add something thought provoking.

I can think about what the characters must feel in the desert alone for...5 minutes? The cinematography was great and all, and I have nothing against extended shots (I was impressed by how well co-ordinated Elephant was, even though I was bored by that too).

Not sure if it's the worst movie I've ever seen, I've watched House of the Dead, and was entertained from a comedic point of view, I watched Gerry and didn't much enjoyment at all out of it. None emotionally, none intellectually, and some visually.

[–] PassTheMiike 18 years ago

I'm by no means a fan of Van Sant, but I do feel that Gerry is one of his best works, simply because it evokes the feeling of actually being lost in the dessert. Then again, I did see this film in a movie theatre and loved it; I think that, similar to Lost in Translation, it loses something in its translation from 35mm big screen to video. I can't say exactly how I liked it, why I liked it, or why I think it's his best, but it just had such an impact on me in theatres that it stays as one of my favorite Van Sant and one of my favorites of 2003.

I still think the last three films Van Sant has made (Gerry, Elephant, Last Days) are his best, even when compared to Drugstore Cowboy and My Own Private Idaho.

[–] netlord80 18 years ago

I for one am not a huge indie fan, but I do enjoy some of them. To me this is by far the worst film that I have ever seen. It bumped "Plan 9 From Outer Space". At least that one was comical.

I did find it thought provoking though. I kept thinking about how long they could drag the thing out. Another thought I had was "what on earth were they thinking?" I mean how did the screenplay look? Just a bunch of "They walk in the desert"? Watching the cars go by in front of my house would have been more entertaining.

And no I am not some inbred moron. I happen to have a highly technical job that requires above average intellect. I may enjoy mindless films at times, but I never claim them as good. Some are interesting and others are simply visually stimulating. If I want intellectual stimulation I will watch the History, Science, or other similar chanels. Or I will read a book (I particularly enjoy Physics).

Also, some films can lack a plot and still be entertaining. Personally I enjoyed Clerks even though it lacked a plot. Not the most intellectually stimulating piece, but enjoyable. This film was little more than a very long screensaver.

[–] TheWanderingFish 12 years ago

Ooh... A highly technical job that requires above average intellect? That's impressive.

I also have a highly technical job that requires above average intellect. Whether or not you consider the film "good," it most certainly isn't mindless.

With that said, intelligence has very, very little to do with ones reaction to art - particularly this kind of art. You either connect with the film or you don't, and it's not worth condemning someone over either way.

I suppose on a clear day you can see the class struggle from here

[–] TheWanderingFish 12 years ago

Similarly, I really hate the (more common) assumption that if you do like Gerry, you must be a pretentious hipster.

I think people watch these sort of films and get preemptively defensive when they find themselves disliking them. They imagine that they're missing something (you're not) and that there's a large group of people who love the film and who judge everyone who dislikes it, and so they start thinking up insults for those who do enjoy it. In reality, I think most of us who love this movie realize that we are in a minority even among film buffs, and we don't feel the need to attack everyone who disagrees with our opinion.

The film either affects you or it doesn't - I personally found it to be an utterly gorgeous and transcendent experience, and I love it enough to have watched it half a dozen times since I discovered it a few years ago. I had an incredibly strong emotional reaction to the film - I didn't watch any movies for several days afterwards because I didn't want to ruin the effect it had on me.

But I don't think I have any particularly deep understanding of the film. I most certainly don't think anyone who doesn't enjoy the film is "stupid" or "doesn't get art" or anything like that. You're just either on the film's wavelength or you're not.

I do think that it uses music perfectly. And that it has perfect cinematography. But it's not really the type of film you can "convert" people to.

I suppose on a clear day you can see the class struggle from here

[–] jaredmillington 9 years ago

I agree with this fish. Well said

Sort of a cruel joke (as I despised the entirety of this movie) but I tell everyone to watch it and lend it to them. I go on about how awesome it was and how it changed my life.

So far out of the 30 odd people I've got to watch it, I've yet to get sick of watching them hand it back to me and say "Ya man it pretty good". When I ask how surprised they were that ben affleck made a cameo, so far everyone has said "oh ya, I was surprised" or "Ya I thought that was funny" etc....

To me it was pretty but I'd rather a BBC nature doc with morgan freeman to put me on that next level sh*t. At least that way I learn something about penguins or seaweed.