MovieChat Forums > Blindness (2008) Discussion > Possibly the worst film I've ever seen

Possibly the worst film I've ever seen

posted 14 years ago by keaton421
87 replies | jump to latest

And I'm not the type to EVER jump on IMDB and rant and rave like this.

I don't mean to offend anyone, but... I made it through about 30 minutes before I had to turn it off.

This is some of the worst, most wooden acting I've ever seen. The dialogue is just abysmal! It seems like two hours of people stumbling around and delivering their lines with the skill and depth of a high school drama student.

And it wasn't just the delivery that was awful - the writing itself was terrible.

Am I missing something here? I think I've got pretty good taste in films, and I've heard that the novel this movie's based on is real high quality.

How did you guys manage to sit through this?

[–] grandfunkfan 14 years ago

Indeed--at least the worst film I've seen in a long, long time. This is a remarkable feat, because I frequently browse the shelves for cheesy looking movie covers that I know are going to be BAD. Blindness was not one of these, it was supposed to be good based on my viewing recommendations.

[–] kriegaffe 14 years ago

You people voted for Hubert Humphrey, and you killed Jesus!

[–] loco_pescados 14 years ago

saw the trailer, considered a good concept, finally got around watching when it was free-on-demand.. thats how i sat trough it.

to be honest, thought the Japanese couple were the most interesting but looking back, could be considered the more 'wooden'. like when they're talking about a holiday together and she brushes him off... all said while facing a wall they can't see..

that could be phoning it in but I still like the storytelling of it.

[–] shapethrower 14 years ago

I'm with you ;)

Last name? I'd rather not say. My brother's in politics. ~ Raoul Duke.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] hels-dunleavy 13 years ago

awesome quote!

[–] I_Created_U 11 years ago

As far as i'm concerned this movie is a masterpiece. The best i've seen in 2012!

"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs"

[–] doctor-k-1 10 years ago

You must be blind. Get it?

[–] Professor_Zoom 9 years ago

Saw the whole movie. It was just terrible. Very boring and bad acting.

[–] mihail75 14 years ago

why is it bad??? because you dont like the idea? The movie is great, even if it has a very sad story.

[–] darth_insidious 14 years ago

The delivery of the lines may have seemed awkward but that may be because they were aiming for a more realistic conversation than the hyper articulate and unreal speech that most movies include. I wouldn't say they were entirely successful but it was a decent attempt and there was certainly a connection to the awkwardness and banal delivery that composes everyday interaction. Give me this over the last movie i watched; 2012, where not a word that came from the charcters mouths seemed original or unexpected. I swear they didn't write the dialogue but just shredded old action and disaster movie scripts then grabbed some sellotape.
The tiraisu/tart and i forgot what it was i was going to say scene shows the style quite nicely.

[–] im_in 14 years ago

the fact that 2010 is even in the same ballpark, grade wise, as this movie is just a testament to what people take for quality storytelling these days ...

2012 is a CGI trailer with a story that can be summed up in 10 minutes and is obviously not even a secondary part of the movie..... and that has 6/10 ... pathetic ...

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Tales-from-the-Goondocks 12 years ago

Well, this is a bad drama, and 2012 is an average popcorn flick, so that's pretty much the reason why they both have a similar rating.

[–] EdmundOG 13 years ago

The delivery of the lines may have seemed awkward but that may be because they were aiming for a more realistic conversation than the hyper articulate and unreal speech that most movies include.

Then it should sound unawkward. Think of William H. Macy in "Fargo". Every 'um' and 'ah' was written in the script and he still played it perfectly.

[–] emiller94 14 years ago

This isn't bad because it's dark. I love that. This movie was just horribly acted and written, it was unpleasant, slow, stupid, and none of the characters were likeable or relateable in any way. The most interesting part of the film, played by Gael Garcia Bernal, is truly interesting.....for the fourth or so of the movie that he was in. It was a great concept with the worse execution I have ever seen.

[–] tallard 13 years ago

I disagree on every count. It's not a Hollywood movie, it doesn't obey the same pacing and overperforming that go on in Hollywood films. It's different, and different is good.

***So I've seen 4 movies/wk in theatre for a 1/4 century, call me crazy?**

[–] tiligo-mes92 9 years ago

It's different, and different is good.

All I can imagine now is a black, an asian, a caucasian, a jew and an arabic person holdings hands altogether in some 90's margarine commercial.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fishcorn 14 years ago

"Possibly the worst film I've ever seen"

"I don't mean to offend anyone, but... I made it through about 30 minutes before I had to turn it off."

Then you haven't actually seen it, have you?

[–] Randy_D 14 years ago

I was ready to bail at the one hour mark. Don't ask me how I managed to make it through this horrible movie.

[–] CamStatis 14 years ago

you said you turned it off after 30 minutes but then said it seems like 2 hours of so and so? how do u know what it is 2 hours of if you dont even open your mind to give it a chance? it is DEFINATELY not 2 hours of people stumbling around...

[–] pgbrush 14 years ago

No, it's one hour of people stumbling around streets and corridors, and another hour of the director stumbling around looking for a plot / characterization / a point....

www.pantheonoutcast.com

[–] CamStatis 14 years ago

Its based off a book the director knows the plot already

[–] tlotr_tloz 14 years ago

I've seen it until the end.

Like the OP, I'm also not one to rant about a movie, but this might be the worst movie I've ever seen. (I have to admit I have a pretty good record.)

What a horrible attempt at a movie. Even though it featured some great actors, they didn't act. The script must have been very low budget and the director must have been asleep most of the time.
It's really a shame, because the concept for the movie is really great. It would make for a great movie, and the trailer gave the illusion it was.
But alas. The dialogs were so painful, there were major loopholes that could have been easily avoided.
Bah, I'm ashamed I've even seen this movie.

[–] Cassie366 14 years ago

I agree not only was it awful, but it was long!!

[–] scriptshaker-1 14 years ago

Really? This is the worst? How many films have you seen? Twenty?

To be fair, I think you ought'a watch at least half a film before criticizing it. 30 minutes barely counts as having seen the film. But forgetting that...

I know this sounds harsh I don't mean to come off that way, but I don't believe you have a clue of what 'wooden' acting or stiff dialogue is, because it's not present in this film. I'm not a big fan of this film either, but the dialogue and acting were the only saving graces for it. There's a vast difference between 'realistic' dialog/performance and 'wooden.' This is a film has a deliberate verisimilar quality to it, which means the speech mirrors real life as closely as possible, almost documentary style, and what you see in the film is exactly that. You may be the type that favors the polished, 'heightened reality' dialogue of most films, which is absolutely fine, but it's another style of writing. People stammer, stumble and are clumsy at forming words in real life...and not in a way that uses dramatic pauses. I guess what I'm getting at here is because you like Blues doesn't mean Jazz musicians aren't good performers.

Another hint that you may have missed something is that Ruffalo, Moore, Glover, and Bernal are all undeniably fine actors. The odds that each one of them is giving a rotten performance in a single film together are less than the odds that you may just have poor taste.

[–] astronaut1 12 years ago

I totally agree, it makes me a bit sad that people find an accurate portrayal of humanity as 'wooden', has hollywood really caused people to believe things like this? how long will it be before independant or low budget films like Primer or Clerks stop being made?

[–] Free_Jafa 14 years ago

This movie had *a lot* of problems. None of which you mentioned. Like the glaring plots holes, and sudden case of complete lack of any sense whatsoever by our protagonist. It's like she was hit by a bolt of brainlessness. In fact they all were. And no it was *not* realistic for those who still defend this abomination.

[–] prankkrang 14 years ago

Agreed.

The movie should have been titled Blindness and Stupidity, because every character seemed to be infected with the later as much as the former.

[–] ana-manuel-gouveia 14 years ago

This movie is based on a book. Although I didn't see the movie yet, the book is one of my favourites. José Saramago, the writer of the book, is known for being an activist, always criticising the wrongs of our society (especially the ones from Portugal, his home country), and that's what is doing on this book.
For what I can tell (basing myself on the story of the book) you are missing the big picture. Imagine that everyone gets blind in the world. What do you thing will happen? Don't you think that stupidity will surface on most people? Don't you think that, as always, some people will take advantage of others? Don't take the story so literally. That's not the point. And, although I don't know how good are the translations of the book since Saramago had a unique form of writing, I recommend you all to reed the book before criticising the director and the movie story!

[–] MargaridaSFreitas 13 years ago

I completely agree with you. The book is fantastic, possibly the best one from the great Saramago.

[–] ascent2007 14 years ago

Very much agree.. could not believe the protagonist went down on that guy , I think she liked the situation

[–] LooyCyphr 14 years ago

I think she liked to avoid pain and being killed.

"D-E-S-T-R-O-Y : E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G"

[–] tallard 13 years ago

I didn't see any plot holes...

***So I've seen 4 movies/wk in theatre for a 1/4 century, call me crazy?**

[–] Edren 14 years ago

Not the worst I've seen, but it's a very long way from being the best.

Life is just one damned thing after another - Elbert Hubbard