MovieChat Forums > The Collector (2009) Discussion > Worst movie I have EVER seen

Worst movie I have EVER seen

posted 14 years ago by Shemyaza-1
83 replies | jump to latest

This movie had me raging it was so bad. I have laughed off bad movies before, but this one takes the cake.

The plot is barely inexistant, and what plot it does have, has so many gaping holes through it that every 2 minutes I was thinkin " they don't seriously expect me to believe this, do they?"

Seriously. Freddy Kreuger and Hellraiser seem much more realistic than this. I would believe those killers in real life than I would the killer in this movie, while these are completely surrealistic settings, and THIS movie could at least be plasive in real life, isn't there something *beep* wrong with that?

The man gets thumped with a chandalier with knifes hanging from it and manages to throw it off, without nicking himself from any of the blades hanging, ignore the multiple cuts and manages to do fine, the protagonist has multiple chances to kill him but doesnt is apparantly a mind reader knowing they would electrocute the floor, and being a small guy, is twice as strong as the ex con who works a far more labourous job?

The other characters have no depth, everybody in it was completely stupid and just arrrrrghhh

Am I supposed to be able to swallow this?

I'm not expecting some amazing plot like Oldboy or something, but I DO expect a belivable plot. Saw was believable, the killings had reasons, and it was all intelligently setup and belieavable in a surrealistic sense.

Horrible, horrible movie.

[–] EconomicallyViable 14 years ago

Yeah well keep in mind this was just a spillover from the Saw series, I heard it was meant to be a prequel to Saw or something but they changed the characters and made it a 'new' idea. Oh and apparently a sequel is starting in October. Enjoy ;)

[–] vulley5789 14 years ago

Suspend you're disbelief. If you do that, all your problems are solved, besides the plot.

Saw VII, 10/22/10, all of the pieces come together.

[–] abraxas1122 11 years ago

I'm afraid you're asking for something impossible to do.

Because of the numerous plot holes, illogical situations and confusing moments the suspension of disbelief is broken FOR the viewer.

It's the movie maker job and responsibility to maintain suspension of disbelief, not the viewer's.

The only choice left for the viewer - to be able to enjoy the movie - is to stop caring, supress immersion and switch his gears into comedy, which I guarantee is not the director's intention.

[–] Rabbit-Reviews 11 years ago

I totally agree with you, the characters were awfully written, like fillers between "cool" traps set all around the house. And yes, this movie is intended to be taken seriously, if only they tried to add some humor it would be much better...

Only movies that are worth watching: http://www.rabbit-reviews.com

[–] Dinishte 14 years ago

I agree 100%. This movie was a massive waste of time. I love a good B-Movie or a gory horror with little plot but believable characters. With this, I never got a single positive emotion.

(SPOILERS)

I have a wife and daughter. I would pity the little girl when I looked back. I would value the lives of myself, my wife, and my daughter over her though and I bet ANY OTHER PERSON would as well.

Yes, it would be sad but REALLY?! Going BACK IN?!

Also, when did he have time to do this?
How did he get the family in the first place?
How did the cop NOT call for back up the SECOND he saw the dead guy in the bear traps. How did he miss the dog? Why did he not shoot the armed man in a mask covered in blood?
Why no police escort?

Best of all, why the heck did the thief not have a bloody cell phone?!

TERRIBLE movie. 0/10 for the first time ever from me on any movie.

[–] TheBlueHairKid 14 years ago

Going back in was supposed to support the sympathetic nature of Arkin - BUT he wasn't given any real moments to further enforce a relationship with anyone in the family or the little girl - The only one he seemed to know was the older daughter.The thief without a cell made no sense & the cop is just as stupid as any other in horror.

[–] Dennis_Cooper 14 years ago

And the ending was comical.

[–] zombiehax 14 years ago

What I find more amusing is how useless the characters are other than the thief and the collector. The wife was dumb, the husband I only cared for a little. The boyfriend was onscreen for two seconds and the older sister was just as dumb as the wife.

The little girl...well...basically every single little girl from every single movie.

Why include a side story where the thief has a family? It made absolutely no point.

How is The Collector a collector? He doesn't collect ANYTHING. Not even bugs!

Are we really to assume the little girl was able to stay hidden this WHOLE time?

Cops not calling for backup? Ambulances with no escort? Running in front of a police car? Thief with no cellphone?

There were so many unexplained and silly things in this movie. Total sh*t.

Fact: 31.5% of IMDb users wanted Avatar to win Best Picture.
Fact: 31.5% of IMDb users are idiots.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] witster18 12 years ago

zombiehax quote"Cops not calling for backup? Ambulances with no escort? Running in front of a police car? Thief with no cellphone?"

cops don't always call for back-up... especially not in the context of the scene in this film

Ambulances RARELY have an escort...

people are always running in front of cars...police cars included... and thieves don't take cell-phones on burglaries..it's called evidence...

oh my...

these types of statements are really running this board... and they're ten times worse than this above average low-budget horror that is better than every saw film,... the friday the 13th, halloween, and texas CM REMAKES COMBINED! Not the orig mind you.

I thought this film had many weaknesses and strengths, but for what it is, it's actually pretty good... suspenseful.. made with some style.. good music from Jerome Dillon(luv howlin maggie baby!)... I mean once you consider how weak the american horror genre is over the last decade - it's good.

[–] btc8 12 years ago

The thief's backstory was sort of critical, as he was robbing the house to get money for his family. This explains why Arkin is bent on getting into the safe.

[–] lazyjay817 12 years ago

your an idiot

[–] alvaro-jneto 11 years ago

*you're

[–] iKnowFilm 11 years ago

The ending was fantastic. I'm amazed at how little people are able to enjoy movies these days. Damn critics.

[–] orclord 14 years ago

"How did the cop NOT call for back up the SECOND he saw the dead guy in the bear traps. How did he miss the dog? Why did he not shoot the armed man in a mask covered in blood?
Why no police escort?
Best of all, why the heck did the thief not have a bloody cell phone?!"

the cop never showed any sign that he actually saw the boyfriend's body. the house was dark and there was a curtin in that window. so its very reasonable he didnt see anything or else he most likely would have called for backup.
as for the dog, i dont know, but it could have been behind a bush or something

not shooting the armed man in mask covered in blood? seriously? are you telling us that at 11:30 on a rainy night, you can tell that there is blood on a black mask from 30 feet away? besides, cops are trained to do their best to detain suspects, not gun them down just because things seem strange.

as for the cell phone part. yea, good idea. next time i go rob somebodies house in the middle of the night, i'll be sure to bring a cell phone with me so it can ring and possibly wake somebody up if they happen to be home.

despite the fact that he assumed the family would be gone, he still wore a skimask. because you never know if somebody might still be home.

------
Just because your there, doesnt mean i have to listen to you

[–] bane317 14 years ago

I actually loved this movie, but Orclord dude just did a very bad job at defending it.

Shamone.

[–] Embodiment 12 years ago

His first point was questionable, but the rest of the points he made were 100% correct. The Collector APPEARED to be complying with the cops demands, so why would the cop shoot him? Simply because The Collector looked strange is a moronic statement.
Also if you're a good thief at all, you would leave the cell phone at home...why risk it going off in the middle of a job?

[–] leekingswood 12 years ago

Also if you're a good thief at all, you would leave the cell phone at home...why risk it going off in the middle of a job?

You do realize you can turn off your cell phone, or just turn off the cell phone ringer....right??

"If God did not want them shorn, he would not have made them sheep."

[–] Embodiment 12 years ago

Good point. LoL. However, there is the risk of it being left behind after the job is completed. It likely wouldn't happen if we're talking about a good thief here, but it is still an unnecessary risk.

[–] ethicks00 12 years ago

My first thought is why am I even responding to this *beep* moron. Then I realized why. I like to show *beep* idiots how stupid they really are.

First; any 'thief' worth half a *beep* would have an untraceable throwaway phone. Second; no thief would ever go into a house like that without some sort of protection (whether that be a gun or a knife).

Russel brand said it best. "Please don't ever speak again. You are essentially, an oxygen thief.

[–] Embodiment 12 years ago

Okay... So you can either take a disposable cell (as you suggested) OR you can simply choose to not bring one at all. Both are viable options (depending on the thief)... Nothing idiotic was stated unless you're referring to the original post, and happened to reply directly to mine instead.

[–] Dauw 11 years ago

Russell Brand would know a lot about wasting oxygen I'd imagine.

[–] alvaro-jneto 11 years ago

This is a dumb point to argue though.

So the thief had no cell phone. Even if not likely, is it unrealistic? Is it really that hard to imagine that any given person would go somewhere *gasp* without their mobile phones?!

[–] Dauw 11 years ago

But why would you take a cell phone with you to do any crime? They can track that thing and pin down your position even if it's turned off, and there goes whatever alibi you might have had. Makes sense not to bring one, and he probably wouldn't go through the trouble of getting a disposable phone for the purpose of a break-and-enter, who was he going to call from that anyway?

[–] Sveinargullaksen 11 years ago

You can trace a person using his cell phone. He's a pro, so why take any chances? He's just going to a house which is supposed to be empty, but he wears a skimask, just in case. He's carefull. Why would he bring a cellphone? What are the odds he needs to use it because of an insane murderer? Or anything?

[–] jtfriday2000 12 years ago

"How did the cop NOT call for back up the SECOND he saw the dead guy in the bear traps. How did he miss the dog? Why did he not shoot the armed man in a mask covered in blood?
Why no police escort?
Best of all, why the heck did the thief not have a bloody cell phone?!"

the cop never showed any sign that he actually saw the boyfriend's body. the house was dark and there was a curtin in that window. so its very reasonable he didnt see anything or else he most likely would have called for backup.
as for the dog, i dont know, but it could have been behind a bush or something

not shooting the armed man in mask covered in blood? seriously? are you telling us that at 11:30 on a rainy night, you can tell that there is blood on a black mask from 30 feet away? besides, cops are trained to do their best to detain suspects, not gun them down just because things seem strange.

as for the cell phone part. yea, good idea. next time i go rob somebodies house in the middle of the night, i'll be sure to bring a cell phone with me so it can ring and possibly wake somebody up if they happen to be home.

despite the fact that he assumed the family would be gone, he still wore a skimask. because you never know if somebody might still be home.

Wrong. The cop DID see the boyfriend's body. The cop said something like, "Oh my God," before he went around to investigate through the back. The "Oh my God," is actually a barely audible whisper but the cop says it after shining his light into the house and seeing the boyfriend's body. The cop had his gun drawn because he had seen the body.

Cops are trained to detain suspects. But there are many, many cases where cops shoot first and ask questions later, even on unarmed suspects. You can see videos of cops shooting first and asking questions later on youtube. The cop saw the body, saw the masked man, and became agitated because the masked man wouldn't respond properly. There are videos online with police officers shooting suspects who are posing no threat. So I'm surprised this cop was so slow with his gun.

As far as the cell phone goes, why didn't Arkin ask one of the family members if they had a cell phone, or search for one? It would be unwise to assume they only use landline phones.

My sig: why do almost all movies on imdb have a "worst movie ever!" thread?

[–] bahamut50988 12 years ago

If you watch the scene again where the cop is looking in the house, you can hear him say, "Oh my god." So clearly, he did see the body and never called back-up like an idiot.

[–] racegal15 11 years ago

Well chicken little I guess we can all be thankful that all people aren't like you. I have 3 sons and I couldn't face them knowing I could have saved a kid and didn't just to save myself. Firemen (and women) do it all the time. Here's to all the heroes out there saving all the poor little scared people.

If you don't want to see things that aren't real, turn off the TV, period. Even documentaries and the news are filled with inaccuracies. Do you all really think that hard watching a movie made simply to entertain? It's just a MOVIE! If they were all made without anything impossible or improbable they all be BORING!

As for worst movie ever? I have found that when someone says that it really is quite watchable. Not great mind you, but mindless drivel like most movies. If I wanted gory reality, I'd go walk the streets of Chicago or DC.

[–] justin40580 14 years ago

May i recommend then documentaries. That is if realism is what you are after.

[–] FrightMeter 14 years ago

If this is the worst movie you have ever seen, the you really, really need to see more movies.

It's a frickin' slasher movie people. Sit back and enjoy it without over-analyzing it!

Visit http://www.frightmeter.com for more horror reviews and horror awards!

[–] bmalone135 13 years ago

Are you kidding? Wannabe movie critics feel they have to over-analyze EVERY SINGLE movie they see. It's like, they can't enjoy a movie that was made solely for entertainment.

[–] preparewar 11 years ago

LOL! I definitely agree. People who over-analyze slasher films are absolutely hilarious. Did you morons even watch the trailer before going to see the film? The trailer gives you a great feel for what you are about to watch yet you still go in expecting something that's going to revamp the genre? Then you're so pissed that you take to IMDB to express your dissapointment? IT'S A *beep* SLASHER FILM! Pretty sad.

[–] jojove3 11 years ago

Word!! Watching this now. I've been wanting to see this for a while, I'm a Josh Stewart fan. I'm getting turned off by the critters so far. This is one reason why I may not be able to watch The Collection, just from the previews alone.

Looks like I'll be watching with my hand over my eyes throughout the movie...silly as this sounds. I do love a good scary movie.

Kiss my grits!

[–] laeyisoracle 14 years ago

I agree with the TC. This movie sucked. I just saw it earlier today, and it just seemed like Melton and Dunstan couldn't shake the whole Saw thing. And yeah, I recall hearing at BD that it was intended to be a prequel, and that supposedly it was to be set in the past, and instead of the little girl, it was a little boy(young John Kramer, aka Jigsaw), or something. Oh well, it doesn't matter, because it's not a Saw movie.

There are some things that totally annoyed the hell out of me. The music is one of them. My god, that music was horrible crap. Then they'd interject songs during specific scenes, trying to give it an MTV-feel. Urgh.

BTW, I'm I the only one who hated the constant screams, ghostly moans and murmurs that appeared throughout the movie? There was no point to them. No point at all. And no, they weren't the screams from the people in the house. You'd see Arkin sneaking around, then hear a groan or demonic wail, and for a second, you wonder if the house is haunted. Then the noises that accompany the villain. What the hell? Urgh!!

The camera work was like ADD kid was having an epileptic seizure. Quick cuts, things flashing across the scream for seconds, then are gone. The only movie that beats this one one horrible camera work is Feast.

[–] JordanMichaelKoch 14 years ago

I should probably agree with you... but I liked it. I don't know why, but the movie just worked for me. And I'm usually one to think the exact same thing as what you just said.

Oh, take a gander the bigger they are the harder they fall.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] srb4887 14 years ago

It was indeed truly horrible. It did not work at all.

The biggest distraction to me was the lighting and whatever color correction they did. It was like something for a bad music video. The surrealistic lighting choices did not add to the story, the mood/tone, or even just make things look cool. It was highly annoying and tacky.

The main actor showed basically no emotion. I didn't buy anything he did really. I didn't believe he cared for his family, their interaction was really awkward and off. It was just as strange as his interaction with the little girl. I think the little girl did a much better job than that guy did. It was like he was just going through the motions for his entire job on the movie. He bored me to tears.

There was really no tension or suspense. I was never on the edge of my seat. I didn't even cringe at any of the gore. I thought the camera moving over the doors/walls was a kind of clever shot but that's one of the few things I liked. I think the most tension was probably when the daughter came home with her boyfriend. That scene gave me some hope for it... but that's pretty much the most it delivered.

The traps and deaths were pretty glossed over. You didn't even get a change to really relish any of it. The movie had absolutely no substance, not even on the level of death and gore. And in the end, I don't think I saw anything I've never seen. The acidic goo or whatever was kind of nice but reminded me of things like the stairs in NOES.

I think overall it was just plagued with bad decisions. It comes off as a very amateurish production. I could see making it as a student project. Tacky music video lighting and bad CG.

The synopsis was so promising too. I expected it to border more on The Strangers or Funny Games. It needed a strong backstory for the main character if he wasn't going to be interacting much with people. There could have been an initial part of the traps being set up. If the whole point of the movie was the traps, why not let that be the hook to get you to keep watching? The opener wasn't near graphic enough for a first kill of a movie.

[–] b6283 14 years ago

I like slasher movies, but this was total cr@p. Really, really bad.

I hate it when the IMDB rating is high enough for me to have better expectations. :(