Tonight, I think I just watched the worst movie that I've even seen: Running With Scissors. I found it so bad and disturbing that I actually turned it off and I've never done that before. Many of you might disagree with me on my choice but I'm wondering if any of you have had a similar experience with a movie being unwatchable?

Along Came Polly, everything about it was wrong.

Tonight, I think I just watched the worst movie that I've even seen: Running With Scissors. I found it so bad and disturbing that I actually turned it off and I've never done that before. Many of you might disagree with me on my choice but I'm wondering if any of you have had a similar experience with a movie being unwatchable?

I've switched off hundreds of movies in my liefetime.
Worst movie ever? So far it's "Paris, Texas", however I haven't seen any Pauly Shore films yet.  ;)

The Cat in the Hat was pretty bad!

Freddy Got Fingered.  I actually watched the whole thing to give it a chance.  Somethings sadly cannot be unseen

Along Came Polly, everything about it was wrong.
The best part was when the curtains closed at the end.

Romi and Michelle's High School Reunion comes to mind.

Worst one I ever bought a ticket to see?

"Hardbodies II"
:-[

   Dirty Dancing is one of the worst I've seen...

   Ace Ventura Pet Detective - Stupid movie with a stupid premise featuring stupid star.  Not stupid funny, but stupid stupid...
   The Wedding Singer - Nice try.  Survey says...XXX
   Robin Hood Men in Tights - weak Mel Brooks effort.  History of the World it ain't...
   Tales from the Crypt: Demon Knight - Didn't like this one but can't remember why.  Probably stupid...
   Star Treks 3, 5 and 6 - Stupid (3 - After the exquisite agony of TWOK they bring that green blooded, inhuman back to life?!)  (5 - Spock's bro, Jesus, heaven...*yawn*) (6 - Klingons/Soviets/Chernobyl, get it..?)
   Dolores Claiborne (the un-horrifying horror movie.  Un-spine tingling, un-suspenseful, un-interesting.  Two hours of my life I can never get back...)

Jason V Freddy was pretty bad.....

Jason V Freddy was pretty bad.....


  Jason vs. Freddy Kreuger LOL! - what were you expecting, another Citizen Kane..? ;D

   Jason vs. Freddy Kreuger LOL! - what were you expecting, another Citizen Kane..? ;D


Oh...I knew what it might be like...but it was much worse than my imagination. So bad...it was funny!  ;D

Total Recall-I can still picture that female alien with 3 boobs-not a pretty sight....to me!!


When I was young my older cousin and I snuck into "Terms of Endearment".  ???  After about 40 minutes of Mother and daughter Shirley Maclaine and Debra Winger screaming at each other we looked at each other and said "We could do this at home!" and snuck into another theatre.


Titanic-my Mom finally forced me to watch it with her at least 10 years after it came out and I hated it all but the last couple of minutes-I was glad when it was over!

Hand Down, Howard the Duck. I just thought it was the silly waste of 2 hours I've never spent.  >:(

Without a doubt.........1990's Sonny Boy.
Paul Smith {Blutto from the Popeye Movie} is married to a Woman named Pearl.
They steal a child...since they can't have one of their own.
The Boy is raised...in a cage........only brought out to kill Smith's enemies.......
Leonard Maltin sums it up as......"A repulsive, socially irredeemable waste of celluloid ... filmed for no apparent reason other to offend and appall" Normally.......I seek this type of Film out.. ::) But....even I couldn't overcome the ridiculously boring goings on. The ONLY Film I ever walked out on.......
Oh yeah...............Pearl.................was played by David Carradine.....in drag {complete w/ wig}

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/4961/sonnyboyl.th.jpg

Romi and Michelle's High School Reunion comes to mind.


:( I actually like that movie.

And someone mentioned Titanic. I love that movie too...

I feel conflicted now.

Without a doubt.........1990's Sonny Boy.
Paul Smith {Blutto from the Popeye Movie} is married to a Woman named Pearl.
They steal a child...since they can't have one of their own.
The Boy is raised...in a cage........only brought out to kill Smith's enemies.......
Leonard Maltin sums it up as......"A repulsive, socially irredeemable waste of celluloid ... filmed for no apparent reason other to offend and appall" Normally.......I seek this type of Film out.. ::) But....even I couldn't overcome the ridiculously boring goings on. The ONLY Film I ever walked out on.......
Oh yeah...............Pearl.................was played by David Carradine.....in drag {complete w/ wig}

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/4961/sonnyboyl.th.jpg


Wow! Sounds like a movie that should come with the disclaimer "You will need therapy after this movie ends."

Total Recall-I can still picture that female alien with 3 boobs-not a pretty sight....to me!!

I loved Total Recall!  :)

By the way, this topic has been done before on this board:

http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php?topic=33695.0

I wonder if David Carradine needed it , afterwards...... ;)

Wow! Sounds like a movie that should come with the disclaimer "You will need therapy after this movie ends."

Titanic... didn't much care for it myself. :-\\

Tonight, I think I just watched the worst movie that I've even seen: Running With Scissors. I found it so bad and disturbing that I actually turned it off and I've never done that before. Many of you might disagree with me on my choice but I'm wondering if any of you have had a similar experience with a movie being unwatchable?



I never saw Running with Scissors kinda reminds me of Royal Tannenbaums and I hated Royal Tannenbaums.



Romi and Michelle's High School Reunion comes to mind.



aw....come on Step... Romy & Michele....that was a funny movie!



Worst one I ever bought a ticket to see?

"Hardbodies II"
:-[



did ya go see Hardbodies I?  ???

  Dirty Dancing is one of the worst I've seen...

  Ace Ventura Pet Detective - Stupid movie with a stupid premise featuring stupid star.  Not stupid funny, but stupid stupid...
  The Wedding Singer - Nice try.  Survey says...XXX
  Robin Hood Men in Tights - weak Mel Brooks effort.  History of the World it ain't...
  Tales from the Crypt: Demon Knight - Didn't like this one but can't remember why.  Probably stupid...
  Star Treks 3, 5 and 6 - Stupid (3 - After the exquisite agony of TWOK they bring that green blooded, inhuman back to life?!)  (5 - Spock's bro, Jesus, heaven...*yawn*) (6 - Klingons/Soviets/Chernobyl, get it..?)
  Dolores Claiborne (the un-horrifying horror movie.  Un-spine tingling, un-suspenseful, un-interesting.  Two hours of my life I can never get back...)



WHAT!?!?!?!  I LOVE DIRTY DANCING!!!!




and I liked the Wedding Singer. 

Jason V Freddy was pretty bad.....


It was meant to be.......wasn't it?  :-\\



  Jason vs. Freddy Kreuger LOL! - what were you expecting, another Citizen Kane..? ;D


;D



Oh...I knew what it might be like...but it was much worse than my imagination. So bad...it was funny!  ;D



so bad it was funny.... yeah.. I think that was the point. 

Titanic-my Mom finally forced me to watch it with her at least 10 years after it came out and I hated it all but the last couple of minutes-I was glad when it was over!





I wonder how anabel and Michael C are doing?  :-\\  anyway.....


Titanic was a horrible flick and since anabel isn't around I'll tell you why Tiff  ;) 


It was flawed from the start. 

A) it was set up to be a flash back movie yet they showed scenes that Rose wasn't in so how could she possibly relay those moments?
B) the film starts with the crew discovering the Titanic, Rose calls the head of the expedition (was that Bill Paxton?) and asks if he's discovered the heart of the ocean diamond or whatever it's called... then she comes on board the ship to...what? see if she can be there when they discover the stupid jewel she has been keeping in her pocket the entire time anyway.    All she had to say was I am a survivor of the titanic can I come aboard your ship and see what you discovered and tell you my story? There was no need for this non-mysterious mystery about the fate of the diamond necklace. 



 


And someone mentioned Titanic. I love that movie too...

I feel conflicted now.

The Howling (1980) ;D

Love and Other Drugs.  Even Anne Hathaway's boobies couldn't save this film

Sorcerer (1977) starring Roy Sheider.

The Blair Witch Project was a close second.

A wonderful flick called "Don't Go In The Woods" and the tag line should read, "Don't go to see it." Yes, I actually paid $ to see that and walked out-it was THAT BAD!!!  8-P


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Go_in_the_Woods



Cat

aw....come on Step... Romy & Michele....that was a funny movie!




I agree... I enjoyed that one. Some years later, a made-for-tv prequel entitled "Romy & Michele: In The Beginning" was made, and televised by ABC Family; that one wasn't as great, although it did have its moments.

Sucker Free city
Serenity
Men in black
The cat in the hat
Freddy got fingered
Ace Ventura

These really shoudln't count coz I couldn't stomach myself to watch them all the way.  8-P

I also liked Romi and Michelle's High School Reunion.

Sucker Free city
Men in black
The cat in the hat
Freddy got fingered
Ace Ventura




Fixt!  :D

The Howling (1980) ;D


It was better than the second one...The Howling 2, Your Sister is a Werewolf.

It was better than the second one...The Howling 2, Your Sister is a Werewolf.


I bet it is better than the second one and the third one. :D

There are many people who love this film and think it's brilliant but I hate Eraser Head.  I watched it once and I hated it and I tried to watch it again and I hated it...maybe I just don't get it.  :-\\

There are many people who love this film and think it's brilliant but I hate Eraser Head.  I watched it once and I hated it and I tried to watch it again and I hated it...maybe I just don't get it.  :-\\

haha, this one I hated as well.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51ns22KNgbL.jpg

Do NOT watch this movie.

Sure it's a straight-to-DVD release which you've almost certainly never heard of, but it one of your friends ever comes up to you with this DVD and tells you it's funny and you should watch it, DON'T.

Instead just do yourself (and everyone else around you) a favor and kick him in the nuts, take the DVD away from him, then drive out to the nearest lake and throw it in.

A friend from work loaned it to me and it was so bad that after it was over I actually called him up and yelled at him and called him an asshole.

Don't even watch it out of curiosity just to see how bad it really is. You'll be so mad at me that you'll probably look me up online so you can find out where I live and then wait out in front of my place until I get home from work, and then kick me in the nuts.

Billy Jack  soooo bad.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/_JnYdydEJQ3g/TcjQVRxtbUI/AAAAAAAAPgA/94i5CDXDMm8/billy%20jack%20poster.jpg

(500) Days of Summer, the Zooey Deschanel romance movie. it's actually a quite loved movie, but i detested it. and in a perfect kind of way, too... EVERYTHING about it was wrong.

Aside from Howard the Duck, I have to say recently, The Exorcism of Emily Rose.

I spent years dogding that film because I literally thoguht it would scar me for life and I finally got the nerve to watch it last week. It was so damn dissapointing, I can't even tell you. It wasnt; anything like I imagined. I fgured it would be like the Exorcist on steroids or something. Thriller was scarier to me than this movie. The only thing disturbing was ehrn the girl would curl up in strange poses. But there was no head spinning, no pea soup spitting, nothing of any real signifigance. It was a crock and I wasted two hours of my life on it. Hell, I've had nightmares scarier than what I saw.

One that I actually saw in the theater and paid full price (not matinee or rental?)  Eyes wide shut.  I kept hoping it would get better...


One I saw recently, my husband bought it for a dollar and the DVD had 3 other movies on it... Leeches.  OMG.  It was...a 2003 homoerotic horror movie.  We had no idea before we watched it.  It's funny and awful at the same time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8LShEyGRp8

did ya go see Hardbodies I?  ???



I only went to Hardbodies II 'coz I wanted to see some tit-tay!  It even delivered poorly on that front!

Most acclaimed motion picture to make my worst movie list:

"The Last Temptation of Christ." (1987)  Even Scorsese strikes a sour note now and again.  I Thought Last Temptation was a dreary conglomeration of deliberate gainsaying of Catholic dogma, and even in doing so, Scorsese made a film so long and so tedious I couldn't keep myself awake through the second half.

Jason V Freddy was pretty bad!  Not in a scary way ... but in a cringing, embarrassed sort of way.

Two movies I recommend:

Summer School. It's SO bad, I don't even remember anything but the title. And to think I actually saw it twice.
(I know there's at least two movies with this title, and I'm pretty sure it's not the one featuring Mark Harmon... ::))

Sasquatch Hunters (2005). So bad, I've never subjected myself to watching the full movie. After reading the synopsis, and after seeing some scenes (while in the process of channel hopping) I decided it would be a complete waste of time and energy. The CGI special effects are mindboggingly TERRIBLE! Any child can see the so-called sasquatches are completely fake. And of course, the acting is of a similar dusturbingly poor level.
WARNING: rated 3.4 on IMDb. ;)

One that I actually saw in the theater and paid full price (not matinee or rental?)  Eyes wide shut.  I kept hoping it would get better...





I agree. I thought it should be good because it had Tom Cruise & Nicole Kidman but man, it really sucked the big one!  8-P



Cat

I agree. I thought it should be good because it had Tom Cruise & Nicole Kidman but man, it really sucked the big one!  8-P



Cat


I love the Masked Ball scene. 

The music is composed by English violist Jocelyn Pook.  She uses a backwards recording of Romanian priests celebrating orthodox mass.  I think it's beautiful, but it tends to freak people out!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/evil7.gif

aw....come on Step... Romy & Michele....that was a funny movie!


I'm trying to remember why I said that...

Because the live action version of Fist of the North Star is actually one I really really hate.

Two movies that everyone MUST see because they are so godawful:

"The Room", which is the epic classic by the godlike Tommy Wiseau.  This movie is just a masterpiece of shyt.

"Hell Comes to Frogtown", with Roddy Piper.  This movie was so terrible that I was hammering back shots just to forget how craptacular it was.

I agree. I thought it should be good because it had Tom Cruise & Nicole Kidman but man, it really sucked the big one!  8-P



Cat
Not only TC and NK, it was made by Stanley Kubrick, another reason to be a good film, I was disappointed too.

Titanic... didn't much care for it myself. :-\\
I was not happy with that film, with mixing the truth with fiction.

Released last year "Sex Tape", starring Cameron Diaz, it was dire!

Good Burger with Keenan And Kel.

Ghost Rider.

Good Burger with Keenan And Kel.


You had to be under 12 in 1997 to like that movie.

Ghost Ship

Scary Movie part 15 or something.

Freddy Vs Jason  ... was a pretty bad film overall.

Freddy Vs Jason  ... was a pretty bad film overall.


I liked the movie.  :-[  :-[

I liked the movie.  :-[  :-[


It was so bad it's good.  ;D

You had to be under 12 in 1997 to like that movie.


That film was so bad, I watched a little bit of it and I returned it afterwards.

It was so bad it's good.  ;D


To me it was a solid film. Not a 10/10 or anything.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/60/Norbit_(2007_film)_poster.jpg

I like Eddie Murphy but damn this one film was awful.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/60/Norbit_(2007_film)_poster.jpg

I like Eddie Murphy but damn this one film was awful.

Why does he always like the play every character in the same movie?

Why does he always like the play every character in the same movie?
"Meet Dave" is a far better film!

Why does he always like the play every character in the same movie?


I don't know, ask him, I don't know the answer to that one Katana.

http://www.filminamerica.com/Movies/LeonardPart6/leonard-poster.jpg

Leonard Part 6

Why does he always like the play every character in the same movie?
If it is in the script... ?

Why does he always like the play every character in the same movie?


It's his schtick.  Coming from snl he did a lot of characters so it was fun to see him 'show his range' in coming to America.

After nutty prof tho it just got old....

It's his schtick.  Coming from snl he did a lot of characters so it was fun to see him 'show his range' in coming to America.

After nutty prof tho it just got old....
Yes, the idea does sound old hat now.

It's his schtick.  Coming from snl he did a lot of characters so it was fun to see him 'show his range' in coming to America.

After nutty prof tho it just got old....


Arsenio Hall did the same thing in the film.

Arsenio Hall did the same thing in the film.


Just the one film. And only because Eddie wanted him to

Rocky Horror Picture SHow is a pretty bad movie, but you don't go to see it for the movie itself.  ;D

"The room" it has to be the worst movie of all time..

"The room" it has to be the worst movie of all time..


agreed...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvuwldnG7c0

agreed...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvuwldnG7c0


Ah! Cinema Sins, that is one of my favorite youtube channels.

Ah! Cinema Sins, that is one of my favorite youtube channels.


mine too... between that and Honest Trailers I can be entertained for HOURS!!!!

mine too... between that and Honest Trailers I can be entertained for HOURS!!!!


I too watch Honest Trailers.  How about Couch Tomato's channel? Cinema Sins pushed this guys channel
so I gave it a try. You can't argue with his logic, 24 reasons why two different movies are actually the same.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2Xgpjg0R_k

I too watch Honest Trailers.  How about Couch Tomato's channel? Cinema Sins pushed this guys channel
so I gave it a try. You can't argue with his logic, 24 reasons why two different movies are actually the same.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2Xgpjg0R_k



that's a new one for me... thanks I still have 4 hrs left in my shift with nothing to do!


* damn... that's so spot on I'll have to rethink why I don't like Star Wars...  but love Guardians!

Dragonball Evolution!! 

Three films I have recently seen, both were utterly dire:

Wild Card
That Awkward Moment
The Human Stain

I've seen many bad movies, yet when I'm halfway through a movie, I feel obligated to finish watching it.

From the top of my head, "All About Steve".  The main character was so annoying, and I'm normally a Sandra Bullock fan.

But I think this movie takes the cake: "Feeling Minnesota".  Again, I'm normally a fan of Keanu Reeves  ;)  and Cameron Diaz, but I watched the beginning of this movie several years ago before changing the channel because it didn't seem that thrilling.  Recently I decided to try to watch it again on YouTube, figuring that my taste might have changed.  WRONG!  I tried watching the whole movie, but it was so painful, and I even started visiting other websites as the movie progressed.

Maybe it's because I'm not a huge fan of the genre, but these would make my list of worst sci-fi:

A Boy and His Dog (1975) (starring a young Don Johnson) I have to admit I only tried to watch 10 minutes.  It might have gotten better

However, I did watch the whole of Idaho Transfer (1973), dir. Peter Fonda.  Ugh!

Battle Beyond the Stars starring Richard Thomas

oh, and I couldn't stand The Royal Tenenbaums

I've seen many bad movies, yet when I'm halfway through a movie, I feel obligated to finish watching it.

From the top of my head, "All About Steve".  The main character was so annoying, and I'm normally a Sandra Bullock fan.

But I think this movie takes the cake: "Feeling Minnesota".  Again, I'm normally a fan of Keanu Reeves  ;)  and Cameron Diaz, but I watched the beginning of this movie several years ago before changing the channel because it didn't seem that thrilling.  Recently I decided to try to watch it again on YouTube, figuring that my taste might have changed.  WRONG!  I tried watching the whole movie, but it was so painful, and I even started visiting other websites as the movie progressed.


All about Steve was pretty bad

Three films I have recently seen, both were utterly dire:

Wild Card
That Awkward Moment
The Human Stain
I fear I have more bad films on my list-to-view.

Spy Kids 3D:  Game Over.  After this atrociously boring and incoherent film, I never saw 3D cinema the same way ever again.

Why does he always like the play every character in the same movie?



I know I have taken a long time to answer this but here it goes.

The reason he plays all the characters so he doesn't have to pay another actor and he can get paid for each character he plays. Then if the movie makes money-he gets the royalties for each character. Unfortunately, he doesn't realize how bad his movies usually are so he doesn't rake it in like he had hoped.



Cat

w_lphmbPUwE

Jimmy Hollywood

I don't recommend this movie unless you're looking for a cure for insomnia.  ;D

w_lphmbPUwE

Jimmy Hollywood

I don't recommend this movie unless you're looking for a cure for insomnia.  ;D


Looks lame.

Looks lame.


Trust me Kat it was the most sorry excuse for a film I ever saw in my life. It was lame by 1994 standards.  By the time this flick ended I was so bored I almost fell asleep.  :P

I don't know if I answered this before, but "The Birth of a Nation" was really more than I could stomach. I saw this movie only knowing that it had been banned for a long time in the 100 years since its release. But I never knew WHY. I saw the film. That's 3 hours I'll never get back. And when I went on my blog to complain, I googled the movie poster.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/23/2e/37/232e373883b75df342d7eadf2833c20e.jpg

If I had known I was watching KKK propaganda, I would have changed the channel. I was especially pissed as not only a Black woman, but also as a Christian when I saw Jesus blessing the Klansmen at the end of the film. One of the few times I wanted to bite a cyanide tablet.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f8/Dragonball_Evolution_US_Soundtrack_Cover.PNG


http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/mkwikia/images/e/e7/Mortal_Kombat_Annihilation_Soundtrack_Cover.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20110103234324


These are the biggest pieces of garbage I've EVER SEEN!!! 8-P >:(

Hot Tub Time Machine 2 was pretty awful of the movies that I've seen recently  8-P

Add "Get Hard" starring Will Ferrell and  Kevin Hart to the list.

Ghost Ship
Back then I started "Ghost Ship", only saw the first 10 minutes and the look of it is bad. I recorded it last night so that I can watch it properly to the storyline etc.

BTW, it has 14% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Back then I started "Ghost Ship", only saw the first 10 minutes and the look of it is bad. I recorded it last night so that I can watch it properly to the storyline etc.

BTW, it has 14% on Rotten Tomatoes.
Yes, it is still bad!

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f8/Dragonball_Evolution_US_Soundtrack_Cover.PNG


http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/mkwikia/images/e/e7/Mortal_Kombat_Annihilation_Soundtrack_Cover.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20110103234324


These are the biggest pieces of garbage I've EVER SEEN!!! 8-P >:(


Don't remind me  ;D

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f8/Dragonball_Evolution_US_Soundtrack_Cover.PNG


http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/mkwikia/images/e/e7/Mortal_Kombat_Annihilation_Soundtrack_Cover.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20110103234324


These are the biggest pieces of garbage I've EVER SEEN!!! 8-P >:(
The list gets bigger?

Have I mentioned the Cameron Diaz film "Sex Tape" yet?

Alone in the Dark (2005). The fact that Tara Reid plays a bespectacled anthropologist with a specialty in ancient languages is your first clue... That it also features Christian Slater and Stephen Dorff should be your second. Anyway, it's bloody awful and I don't know why I watched it from start to finish - I thought it might be entertaining in a B-movie sort of way. But it wasn't. It wasn't "so bad it's good" - it was just really, really bad.

In the same vein, I remember the 1999 remake of The Haunting being bleeding awful. Stupid dialogue, bad acting, zero character development, ridiculously over-the-top CGI special effects, a haunted mansion that looks like a Disney castle, and just an incredibly boring movie. Also way too long. I felt every one of its 113 minutes... Every. Single. One.

Troll 2 (1990) is different - it's more of the "so bad it's good" variety, with a lot of genuinely laugh-out-loud moments. But objectively speaking, it still certainly stands as one of the worst movies I've watched from start to finish. Needs to be seen to be believed.

I think I speak on behalf of '90s kids everywhere when I say this:

http://cinemassacre.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/tmnt3-1.jpg

Ugh, TMNT: III was just a horrible movie. I mean, who the heck thought it would be a good idea to take the Turtles out of the sewers of Manhattan and put them in Feudal Japan? This movie was so bad, I even hated it as a 6-year-old.

Add "Get Hard" starring Will Ferrell and  Kevin Hart to the list.


Hot tub time machine was horrible... Thank god I didn't go see it in theatres..

Hot tub time machine was horrible... Thank god I didn't go see it in theatres..


The second one was way way way worse then the first one.  Really. 

Ones I've seen recently. These are really just movies I've limped through to the end.  Typically, I will turn a movie off after 10-20 minutes if I hate it.

The Avengers  -  boring action flick and a CGI mess.
Total Recall (the remake)  -  an even bigger CGI mess.
40-Year Old Virgin  -  not funny. I hate "the Office" too.

Disney:

Sahara - just bad.
Jungle 2 Jungle - even worse.

My boyfriend and I went to go see The one with Bill Murray, I think it was called Rock the Kasba. It was pretty bad!

I've gone through many of these posts and a lot of those movies were bad that I've seen before, heard of, or I'm aware of. Here's one movie that my aunt introduced me to, it's called Devil's Advocate (1997) and I saw it on VHS several years ago, and it was a horror movie but at the same time I got the symbolic messages and spiritual side of the movie and it was just so horrifying that it was horrible! I had nightmares of it too.

https://stephenbrownprducer.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/devils-advocate-expanded-frontsmall.jpg

Dragonball Evolution!!


This, The Last Airbender (2010), and Percy Jackson & the Lightning Thief (2010) sucked too. Because I read all the books throughout 7th & 8th grade and it had so many flaws in there. Didn't even bother watching the 2nd one, Seas of Monsters (2013).

Spy Kids 3D:  Game Over.  After this atrociously boring and incoherent film, I never saw 3D cinema the same way ever again.


LOL, I loved the concept of it, it was like an imaginative video game in my young head at the time, I actually enjoyed every Spy Kids movie in theaters, probably because I was only 7 then and didn't care, you were older than me at the time and had better sense of yourself.

American Pie: Book Of Love, It had it's funny moments but overall this film was crap.

Everything about the film "Mordecai" is so wrong.

The worst movie I ever saw is still Freddy Got Fingered.  If I had to round out a second one, It would be a toss-up between Sunshine and 28 Days Later.  I hated those equally, and interestingly enough, Irish actor Cillian Murphy was in both of them, and he's a good actor (when given a good movie)

The worst movie I ever saw is still Freddy Got Fingered.  If I had to round out a second one, It would be a toss-up between Sunshine and 28 Days Later.  I hated those equally, and interestingly enough, Irish actor Cillian Murphy was in both of them, and he's a good actor (when given a good movie)
That even qualifies for the worst title for a film?

I was not impressed by "Jupiter Ascending", it was one of those films you wish would have an early finish.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/92/GI_Joe_-_The_Rise_of_Cobra_OST.jpg http://cdn.collider.com/wp-content/uploads/gi-joe-retaliation-international-poster.jpg

I saw both of these movies when Showcase Canada was on free preview last year.  Hardly worth it to me to watch it.  8-P 8-P

Passion of Christ - It wasn't the topic it was the lighting and the gore.
Big Fish I found it irritating.
Clerks

Any movie that I just watched an hour before I sleep, that has gore and limbs being sawed off every ten minutes. I can stand like two or three scenes of gore, but a movie with body parts off every five minutes is too much for me!

Passion of Christ - It wasn't the topic it was the lighting and the gore.
Big Fish I found it irritating.
Clerks


Did you see that Tyler Perry is doing Passion live on Fox soon?

I posted two movies early in this thread, they were Sorcerer and The Blair Witch Project.
I would like to add a movie to that list. Now I am a sucker for stupid movies; I liked Howard
The Duck, Space Balls and Strange Brew but I can't tolerate a minute of this movie.

BASEketball

Did you see that Tyler Perry is doing Passion live on Fox soon?


Be afraid.  BE VERY AFRAID.  :o

Add "The Interview" (2014) to the list.

Recently; it was advd I found. Don't remember the name, but it was two british boys, who were friends, ended up having sex with each others mothers, it didn't stop, until one was getting married...briefly, then the other married, and their young wives(read close in age of them), weren'tvenough to stop one of them. the other one got made, thinking he could've been banging his buddies mother the whole time. Eventually both their wives left them. I don%t remember too much, it was so boring, I had rediscovered my phone had internet.

Recently; it was advd I found. Don't remember the name, but it was two british boys, who were friends, ended up having sex with each others mothers, it didn't stop, until one was getting married...briefly, then the other married, and their young wives(read close in age of them), weren'tvenough to stop one of them. the other one got made, thinking he could've been banging his buddies mother the whole time. Eventually both their wives left them. I don%t remember too much, it was so boring, I had rediscovered my phone had internet.
Who was in it?

I have been told to avoid "Forget Me Not" (2010) at all cost!

I forget what it was called, however I watched this horrible movie about two years ago, which had a caveman fighting a dinosaur and then a drunk Katy Perry walked out from behind a bush and killed both of them...this was just within the opening five minutes. As it turns out, the main character had dreamt this and he realized that he was late to a party he had to attend. At the party, he spoke to Dr Phil, who had his arms around two women. I only watched ten minutes worth of the movie, but it was enough for me to stop watching it.  :P

Jupiter Ascending.  I couldn't even finish it it was so bad.

I highly recommend the Honest trailer for it. And also the CinemaSins "everything wrong with"  you will get to know everything about the movie without suffering through the 170min run time.  Plus both of those are really really funny.

I'm currently watching a ridiculously horrible film written by James roday. It's called gravy. I can't even.

Jupiter Ascending.  I couldn't even finish it it was so bad.

I highly recommend the Honest trailer for it. And also the CinemaSins "everything wrong with"  you will get to know everything about the movie without suffering through the 170min run time.  Plus both of those are really really funny.
I suffered from it too!

I'm currently watching a ridiculously horrible film written by James roday. It's called gravy. I can't even.
Even the stills from the movie look awful.

I suffered from it too!


If you can get it... you should watch the Honest Trailer for Jupiter Ascending It's really very funny and will at least give you something enjoyable back after suffering through the film.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShAeafYCqxk

Pandamonium, it's so bad. I can't even find it on the Internet.  It was a 3D animated film that had a panda in it.

Pandamonium, it's so bad. I can't even find it on the Internet.  It was a 3D animated film that had a panda in it.
Pandamonium is a 1982-83 animated series that aired on CBS, not a movie...

Pandamonium is a 1982-83 animated series that aired on CBS, not a movie...

I saw a movie version, I saw it around 6 years ago, it was at our local movie store. I just looked up that tv show to make sure, and what I saw was different. I can't find it anywhere.

I can't think of any PG-13 or R movies I've seen that were the worst, but I would say Project X was pretty mediocre, although it still had its funny moments though. Kick-Ass 1 & 2 weren't that special TBH either. The worst movies I've ever seen in the movie theater has to be between Happy Feet or Cars 2.

I can't think of any PG-13 or R movies I've seen that were the worst, but I would say Project X was pretty mediocre, although it still had its funny moments though. Kick-Ass 1 & 2 weren't that special TBH either. The worst movies I've ever seen in the movie theater has to be between Happy Feet or Cars 2.
I fell asleep during "Happy Feet 2".

I fell asleep during "Happy Feet 2".


lol, didn't know that movie existed ;D

2011 was a watered down year for kid movies anyway, so no surprise there. Mainstream movies from 2012-present have been where it's at.

Scooby Doo (2002) was probably the worst I've ever seen. I've also seen Twilight and Cars 2 but I think nothing beats Scooby Doo. Plus, Cars 2 wasn't as bad as people say. It had good jokes and music, but the plot was all over the place.

lol, didn't know that movie existed ;D

2011 was a watered down year for kid movies anyway, so no surprise there. Mainstream movies from 2012-present have been where it's at.
Good. 2011 was pretty bad for kid movies.....besides Kung Fu Panda 2 and Winnie The Pooh, the whole kid movie world for 2011 was pretty much garbage. The only thing that comes close to 2011 is 2006 or 2003.

Scooby Doo (2002) was probably the worst I've ever seen. I've also seen Twilight and Cars 2 but I think nothing beats Scooby Doo. Plus, Cars 2 wasn't as bad as people say. It had good jokes and music, but the plot was all over the place.


I'll rather see the 2002 Scooby Doo movie, rather than watching Twilight. At least the 2002 Scooby Doo wasn't that terrible compared to Twilight, in my opinion. Don't even get me started on the Twilight fangirls, which I'm actually glad they shut up about the movies.


Good. 2011 was pretty bad for kid movies.....besides Kung Fu Panda 2 and Winnie The Pooh, the whole kid movie world for 2011 was pretty much garbage. The only thing that comes close to 2011 is 2006 or 2003.


I see 2011 as one of the lamest years for movies in general.

I'll rather see the 2002 Scooby Doo movie, rather than watching Twilight. At least the 2002 Scooby Doo wasn't that terrible compared to Twilight, in my opinion. Don't even get me started on the Twilight fangirls, which I'm actually glad they shut up about the movies.

I see 2011 as one of the lamest years for movies in general.
Well. Er. Um. *checks BoxOfficeMojo and scrolls through* Ew....I really liked the Pirates and the Caribbean, Diary of a Wimpy Kid, Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Real Steel and a few others but that's it.

Well. Er. Um. *checks BoxOfficeMojo and scrolls through* Ew....I really liked the Pirates and the Caribbean, Diary of a Wimpy Kid, Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Real Steel and a few others but that's it.


Yeah.... I actually liked those movies, except for Real Steel.  :-[

Everyone needs to sit down and watch #Horror with a frenemy you want to eliminate.

Everyone needs to sit down and watch #Horror with a frenemy you want to eliminate.


It sounds like one of those movies like Unfriended or Smiley, which fails to be like a genuine horror movie.

http://static.rogerebert.com/uploads/movie/movie_poster/body-of-evidence-1993/large_eTKNtXvRdDoaWN54keYKGzeRqMO.jpg

It's a Madonna film.

Well. Er. Um. *checks BoxOfficeMojo and scrolls through* Ew....I really liked the Pirates and the Caribbean, Diary of a Wimpy Kid, Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Real Steel and a few others but that's it.
The first Pirates and the Caribbean was good, but forget the others.

The first Pirates and the Caribbean was good, but forget the others.


The first is definitely the best, but I personally like the second and third movies, partially because of nostalgia. I was eight when At World's End came out, I grew up on the first three. I liked the fourth the first time I saw it, but have grown to not like it.

i liked "unfriended." more of a thriller than a horror movie.

Hand Down, Howard the Duck. I just thought it was the silly waste of 2 hours I've never spent.  >:(


I don't know what the hell I was thinking when I made this post. Howard the Duck is kitschy as hell, but the real WORST film I've  ever seen is Birth of a Nation. Not the one by that rapist causing a stir at the moment, but the one by D. W. Griffith that basically is a 3 hour long KKK propaganda film. It's literally Triumph des Willens, before Triumph des Willens. I saw it once and only once a few years ago on TCM and only knew it was banned, never knew why. I want that 3 hours of my life back. I was HORRIFIED by the film.  >:(

I don't know what the hell I was thinking when I made this post. Howard the Duck is kitschy as hell, but the real WORST film I've  ever seen is Birth of a Nation. Not the one by that rapist causing a stir at the moment, but the one by D. W. Griffith that basically is a 3 hour long KKK propaganda film. It's literally Triumph des Willens, before Triumph des Willens. I saw it once and only once a few years ago on TCM and only knew it was banned, never knew why. I want that 3 hours of my life back. I was HORRIFIED by the film.  >:(


Yeah... as somebody who has heard of that movie, I don't really tend to be that bad. Despite the fact that it's totally racist, especially when it was used as a KKK propaganda film. However, I think the movie should be used historically as one of the most controversial films ever made. Especially when most people in the early 20th century tends to think that it was one of the greatest films, since it was highly racist at the time.

Yeah... as somebody who has heard of that movie, I don't really tend to be that bad. Despite the fact that it's totally racist, especially when it was used as a KKK propaganda film. However, I think the movie should be used historically as one of the most controversial films ever made. Especially when most people in the early 20th century tends to think that it was one of the greatest films, since it was highly racist at the time.



hate the racist tone of the film but so many conventional film making devices were introduced in that film. Stylistically it's a work of art.

hate the racist tone of the film but so many conventional film making devices were introduced in that film. Stylistically it's a work of art.


If you've lived the black experience, then a film as shamelessly racist as The Birth of a Nation is impossible to forgive. If anything, the groundbreaking cinematography can be factored into the movie's diabolical nature because it highlights the extremes D.W. Griffith took in order to promote his bigotry to the rest of America. Even in 1915, when the movie first came out, it was incredibly controversial with a lot of people, including whites.

I'm not black myself, but I think Apollonia's perspective makes absolute sense. It's the same type of reason I can't watch something like Ace Ventura: Pet Detective or any lesbian vampire movie without being left depressed and uncomfortable.

If you've lived the black experience, then a film as shamelessly racist as The Birth of a Nation is impossible to forgive. If anything, the groundbreaking cinematography can be factored into the movie's diabolical nature because it highlights the extremes D.W. Griffith took in order to promote his bigotry to the rest of America. Even in 1915, when the movie first came out, it was incredibly controversial with a lot of people, including whites.

I'm not black myself, but I think Apollonia's perspective makes absolute sense. It's the same type of reason I can't watch something like Ace Ventura: Pet Detective or any lesbian vampire movie without being left depressed and uncomfortable.


Thank you, and especially now thanks to the carrot running for president, there has been a resurgence in White Supremacy and this film HAS been used as a recruiting tool. I just remember my father telling me about the riots it incited. The film was before my father's time, but his mother, my grandmother, was 11 years old when the film came out. She was a little black girl right here in the heart of the south in Texas with people in white sheets running around. And all I can think of is--if Grandma Louise had been lynched, there would have been no Daddy Harold, and then no Tiffeny. And that's scary.  :o And Griffith was the grandson I believe of a person who had fought in the Civil War for the Confederacy. So just like I spent my child hood hearing tales of how my father punched Nazis while he was in Germany, Griffith was regaled with tales of "the Old South" etc, etc, etc....it's frightening. And yeah, I suppose the cinematography is something, but there are too many other films to look into with more benign subject fare that could be reference. You can say "Birth of a Nation" but no screen it. Leave it as a footnote in cinematic history.

If you've lived the black experience, then a film as shamelessly racist as The Birth of a Nation is impossible to forgive. If anything, the groundbreaking cinematography can be factored into the movie's diabolical nature because it highlights the extremes D.W. Griffith took in order to promote his bigotry to the rest of America. Even in 1915, when the movie first came out, it was incredibly controversial with a lot of people, including whites.


I tend to think that the movie was only positive towards white people in the American South (in the early-mid 20th century), since that's when they were upset that black people were free. That might be the reason why it was extremely praised towards them (especially to a lot of racists today, even though it makes me uncomfortable).

i always see Birth of a Nation lumped in with Triumph of the Will, which is also a rather spectacularly well-made movie from a technical perspective with an absolutely horrendous message.

i always see Birth of a Nation lumped in with Triumph of the Will, which is also a rather spectacularly well-made movie from a technical perspective with an absolutely horrendous message.


Just for old time's sake.  ;)



A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CHEVROLET SMALL-BLOCK V-8.

Chevrolet's small-block V8 is a famous automobile engine. Nicknamed "mouse motor" (opposed to the big block engine, nicknamed "rat") for its compact dimensions compared to other V8 engines of the time, production began in 1955 with the 265 engine. By 1957 it had grown to 283 cu in (4.6 L), and with the optional Rochester mechanical fuel injection, it became one of the first production engines ever to make one horsepower per cubic inch. This engine was used to power the Corvette, and the Bel Air at that time. It would later be extended to other vehicles as well, and replace the old style 265 V8s. The displacement changed over the years, eventually reaching 400 cu in (6.6 L), but none caught on like the 350 cu in (5.7 L) small-block. This engine is still in production today at General Motors Toluca, Mexico plant (primarily for the GM over-the-counter Goodwrench powerplants), but is no longer offered in current model year vehicles since the year 2004. Its production numbers were impressive, with more than 90,000,000 built. It has been produced in carbureted, mechanical fuel injection, and electronic fuel injection forms.

From 1955-74, the small-block engine was known as the "Turbo-Fire V8".

Although Buick, Cadillac, Oldsmobile, and Pontiac also designed V8 engines (see list of GM engines), it was Chevrolet's 350 cu in (5.7 L) small-block that became the GM corporate standard. Over the years, every American General Motors division except Saturn used the Chevrolet small-block, and its descendants (see GM LT engine and GM LS engine) continue as the company's mainstream V8 design today.

The small-block was on the Ward's 10 Best Engines of the 20th Century list.

Chevrolet tested the small-block twice with no water and no oil at wide-open throttle. The first time it lasted an hour and 15 minutes and the second time it lasted two hours.

Major Versions

Generation 1

The original design of the small block remained remarkably unchanged for its production run, which began in 1955 and ended, in passenger vehicles, in 2003. The engine is still being built today for many aftermarket applications, both to replace worn-out older engines and also by many builders as high-performance applications. There were, however many minor changes made to the engine over the years; these changes are listed below.

    * 1955 - The first year of introduction in 265 cu in (4.3 L) only. As was fairly common for the time, no provision for an oil filter was included in the engine design.
    * 1956 - Oil filtration was introduced, using a sock style filter in a canister.
    * 1957 - The engine came with only front mounts, the side mount bosses were present but not drilled and tapped leaving its retrofitting problematic.
    * 1962 - The block's cylinder wall casting was revised to allow four inch bores. Previously, only certain years of the 283 engine (1958-1962) could be bored safely to four inches.
    * 1968 - The main journal diameter was increased to 2.45 in from 2.30 in and the connecting rod journal diameter was increased to 2.10 in from 2.00 in. This allowed the use of cast iron crankshafts as the previous parts were made of forged steel. The rod bolts were changed from 11/32 in. diameter to 3/8 inch. Additionally, the canister/sock style oil filter was now converted to use spin on filters. The oil fill location was moved from a tube on the front of the intake manifold to a cap on either side valve cover.
    * 1987 - The valve cover surfaces were changed such that cylinder head mounting lip was raised and the bolt location was moved from 4 bolts on the perimeter, to 4 bolts down the centerline of the valve cover (this design debuted on the Corvette in 1985, and Chevrolet 4.3 L the year before). The rear main seal was changed from a 2-piece rubber design to a 1-piece rubber design that used a mounting appliance to hold it in place. This necessitated a change in the flywheel/flexplate bolt pattern as well. Also changed were the mounting angles of the center 2 bolts on each side of the intake manifold (from 90 degrees to 73 degrees) and the lifter bosses were increased in height to accept roller lifters. The alloy heads for use in the Corvette still retain the non-angled bolts (center 2 bolts attaching to the intake). Also all carburetors were done away with and replaced by TBI (throttle-body injection) fuel injection that acts some what like a carburetor.
    * 1996 - This was the last change for the Generation I engine, and continued through the end of the production run in 2003; all 1997-2003 Generation I engines were Vortec truck engines. The cylinder heads were redesigned using improved ports and combustion chambers similar to those in the Generation II LT1. This change resulted in significant power increases.

SB2 and SB2.2

(Small Block/second generation) This engine was produced from 1996 to the present for racing applications only. The cylinder heads were redesigned and the lifter bores were offset. The valve sequence for each head was changed from the traditional E-I-I-E-E-I-I-E to a new I-E-I-E-E-I-E-I and because of this the camshaft was redesigned.

Generation II
LT1 from a 1993 Chevrolet Camaro Z28

See the GM LT engine page for more information on the Generation II small-block V8s, which differ mainly in their reverse-flow cooling system.

Generation III / IV
LS1 from a 1998 Chevrolet Camaro Z28

See the GM LS engine page for more information on the current family of General Motors small-block V8s.

Early Small Blocks

The first small block Chevrolet V-8 was a 265 cu in (4.3 L) engine that was developed in 1955 for the Corvette. Displacement and power eventually reached 327 cu in (5.4 L) and 375 hp (280 kW) (in prototypes) before the Corvette switched to Chevrolet big-block power. Although less powerful than big blocks, small block engines have remained popular due to their lower cost (including the cost of performance add-ons) and solid performance and reliability.

265

The 265 cu in (4.3 L) V8 was the first Chevrolet small block. Designed by Ed Cole's group at Chevrolet, it filled the power gap in the 1955 Corvette lineup, producing an impressive 250 hp (186 kW). The little engine went from drawings to production in just 15 weeks. Besides its compact dimensions, the small-block was known for its novel green-sand foundry construction process.

Dimensions were oversquare - 3.75 in (95 mm) bore and 3 in (76 mm) stroke. The small-block's 4.4 in (111.8 mm) bore spacing would continue in use for decades. It was a pushrod cast-iron engine with hydraulic lifters and a 2-barrel or 4-barrel Rochester carburetor. The 1955 conventional passenger car version produced 162 hp (121 kW) with a 2-barrel carburetor, or could be upgraded at extra cost to a "Power Pack" version conservatively rated at 180 hp (134 kW) with a four-barrel Rochester and dual exhaust. The first production year of this engine had no provision for oil filtration built into the block; however, an add-on filter mounted on the thermostat housing was installed during production. Due to the lack of adequate oil filtration provisions, the '55 model year block is typically only desirable to period collectors.

The 1956 Corvette introduced three versions of this engine - 210 hp (157 kW), 225 hp (168 kW) with twin 4-barrel carbs, and 240 hp (179 kW) with a high-lift cam.

    * 1955, 1956 Chevrolet Corvette
    * 1955 Chevrolet, 165 hp (123 kW) (2-barrel) and 195 hp (145 kW) (4-barrel)

283

The 283 cu in (4.6 L) V8 was introduced in 1957. It was a version of the 265 cu in (4.3 L) with a larger bore at 3.87 in (98 mm). There were five different versions ranging from 185 hp (138 kW) to 283 hp (211 kW) depending on whether a single carb, twin carbs, or fuel injection was used. Power was up a bit each year for 1958, 1959, and 1960.

The 1957 engine featured Ramjet mechanical fuel injection, allowing the engine to produce 1 hp (1 kW) per cubic inch, an impressive feat at the time. For 1961, an amazing 315 hp (235 kW) was available from this unit.

    * 1957-1962 Chevrolet Corvette

302

Chevrolet produced a special 302 cu in (4.9 L) engine for Trans Am racing from 1967-1969. It was the product of placing the 3-inch stroke crankshaft from a 283 into a 4-inch bore 327 block. This engine was mostly used in the first-generation Camaro Z28. Just over 100 DZ block 302 engines were used in the, unique to South Africa, Chevrolet Firenza Can Am. Conservatively rated at 290 hp (216 kW), actual output was around 360 hp (268 kW). This block is one of 3 displacements that underwent a transformation for the 1968/1969 period when the main bearing size was increased from 2.30 in to 2.45 in.

307

A 307 cu in (5 L) version was produced from 1968 through 1973. Engine bore was 3.875 inches (98.4 mm) with a 3.25-inch (82.6 mm) stroke.

The 307 replaced the 283 in Chevrolet cars and produced 200 hp (149 kW) SAE gross at 4600 rpm and 300 lb·ft (407 N·m) of torque at 2400 rpm in the 1960s. The later emissions-modified versions produced just 115 hp (86 kW) SAE net, giving the engine one of the lowest power-per-displacement ratings of all time. Chevrolet never produced a high-performance version of this engine, though they did produce, for Outboard Marine Corporation, a high-performance marinized 307, rated at 235 hp (175 kW) and 245 hp (183 kW) SAE gross, depending on year, that shipped with the Corvette/Z-28's cast aluminum valve covers and Rochester QuadraJet carb. Chevy also built other versions of the OMC 307 rated at 210 hp (157 kW), 215 hp (160 kW) and 225 hp (168 kW) SAE gross.

One of the biggest myths about the 307 is that all the blocks were cast with a very low nickel content. However, some 307 blocks, such as casting number 3970020 with suffix VxxxxTHA (x's in place for date), had 010 and 020 stamped under the timing chain cover indicating high tin and nickel content.

327

The 327 cu in (5.4 L) V8, introduced in 1962, had a bore and stroke of 4 in (102 mm) by 3.25 in. Power ranged from 250 hp (186 kW) to 375 hp (280 kW) depending on the choice of carburetor or fuel injection, camshaft, cylinder heads, pistons and intake manifold. In 1962, the Duntov solid lifter cam versions produced 340 hp (254 kW), 344 lb·ft (466 N·m) with single Carter 4-brl, and 360 hp (268 kW), 352 lb·ft (477 N·m) with Rochester mechanical fuel injection. In 1964, horsepower increased to 365 hp (272 kW) for the now dubbed L79 version, and 375 hp (280 kW) for the fuel injected L84 respectively, making the L84 the most powerful naturally aspirated, single-cam, production small block V8 until the appearance of the 385 hp (287 kW), 385 lb·ft (522 N·m) Generation III LS6 in 2001. * L79, L84 1963-1965; Chevrolet Corvette. This block is one of three displacements that under went a major change in 1968/1969 when the main bearing size was increased from 2.30 to 2.4 inches (58.4–61.0 mm). In 1965 the SS malibu choice of the 327/350 hp know as the "L79", with a aluminum manifold, holley squarebore carb, chrome valve covers, a huge 8" balancer, huge 2.02" intake valves and could only be ordered with a 4 speed trans.

400

A 400 cu in (6.6 L) small-block was introduced in 1970 and produced for 10 years. It had a 4.125-inch (104.8 mm) bore and a 3.75-inch (95.3 mm) stroke. Initial output was 265 hp (198 kW) and was only available equipped with a 2-barrel carburetor. In 1974 a 4-barrel version of the 400 was introduced,while the 2-barrel version stopped production in 1975. 1976 was the last year that the 400 was used in a Chevrolet Passenger car, available in both the A-Body and B-Body line. While popular with circle-track racers, the engine was prone to cooling troubles if cylinder heads without steam holes were used. they mostly put out 250 hp stock.

Later Small Blocks

This section documents the odd-size small blocks developed after the 350 appeared in 1969. Many of these basic blocks are variations of the 350 design.

262

The 262 was a 262 cu in (4.3 L) 90° pushrod V8 with an iron block and heads. Bore and stroke were 3.67 in (93 mm) by 3.10 in (78.7 mm). Power output for 1975 was 110 hp (82 kW) and 195 lb·ft (264 N·m). The 262 was underpowered and was replaced by the 305 the following year.

This was Chevrolet's second 4.3 L-displacement powerplant; two other Chevrolet engines displaced 4.3 L: the Vortec 4300 (based on the Chevrolet 350, with two cylinders removed), and a derivative of the LT1 known as the L99 (using the 305's 3.736-inch bore, 5.94-inch connecting rods, and a 3-inch crankshaft stroke).

This engine was used in the following cars:

    * 1975-1976 Chevrolet Monza
    * 1975 Chevrolet Nova

267

The 267 was introduced in 1979 for GM F-Body(Camaro), G-bodies (Chevrolet Monte Carlo, El Camino, and Malibu Classic) and also used on GM B-body cars (Impala and Caprice models). The 267 cu in (4.4 L) had the 350's crankshaft stroke of 3.48" and the smallest bore of any small-block, 3.500 in. The 3.500" bore was also used on the 200 cu in (3.3 L) V6, which was introduced a year earlier. (The 200 was a Chevrolet V6 engine based on the small block with the #3 and #6 cylinders removed).

It was available with a Rochester Dualjet 210 - effectively a Rochester Quadrajet with no rear barrels. After 1980, electronic feedback carburetion was used on the 267.

While similar in displacement to the other 4.3-4.4 L V8 engines produced by General Motors (including the Oldsmobile 260 and Pontiac 265, the small bore 267 shared no parts with the other engines and was phased out after the 1982 model year due to inability to conform to emission standards. Chevrolet vehicles eventually used the 305 cu in (5 L) as its base V8 engine.

305

The 305 variant of the small-block Chevrolet had a displacement of 305 cu in (5 L) with a 3.736-inch (95 mm) bore and 3.48-inch (88.4 mm) stroke. The 262 was considered underpowered for use in vehicles with a wheelbase greater than 110 inches, so GM engineers decided to increase the bore diameter from 3.671 to 3.736 inches (93.2–94.9 mm) and increase the stroke from 3.10 to 3.48 inches (78.7–88.4 mm) (from the 350). Some performance enthusiasts have noted a marked resistance to performance upgrades on the 305 because of its small bore, poor selection of aftermarket cylinder heads, and the relatively high availability of 350 cu in (5.7 L) engines.

Induction systems for the 305 included carburetors (both 2 and 4-barrel), throttle-body injection (TBI), tuned-port fuel injection (TPI), and sequential fuel injection (GM Vortec).

After 1996, its usage was limited to light trucks and SUVs as the Vortec 5000.
Year    hp (kW)    lb·ft (N·m)
1976    140    250    w/2bbl.
1977    145    245    w/2bbl.
1978    140    240    w/2bbl.
1978    160    235    w/4bbl.
1979    130    245    w/2bbl.
1979†    125    235    w/2bbl.
1980    155    240    w/4bbl.
1981    150    240    w/4bbl

† California Emissions

The 305 was used in the following cars:

    * 1977-1993 Chevrolet Caprice (includes Impala)
    * 1977-1986 Pontiac Parisienne
    * 1976-1979 Chevrolet Monza
    * 1976-1979 Chevrolet Nova (also GM X-body clones after 1976)
    * 1976-1992 Chevrolet Camaro
    * 1976-1988 Chevrolet Malibu, Chevrolet El Camino, and Chevrolet Monte Carlo
    * 1978-1992 Pontiac Firebird
    * 1978-1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass (US Market only, Canadian market 1978-1987)
    * 1991-1992 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser
    * 1981-1987 Pontiac Grand Prix
    * 1975-1979 Buick Skylark
    * 1977-2003 Chevrolet/GMC Trucks, SUVs, Vans
    * 1991-1992 Cadillac Brougham

LG3

Years:1976-1980

Dualjet 2 bbl carb version with 8.5:1 compression.

LG4

Years: 1980-1987

The LG4 was the "low output" 305 cu in (5 L) (compared to the L69). It produced 150 hp (112 kW)-170 hp (127 kW) and 240 lb·ft (325 N·m)-250 lb·ft (339 N·m). The addition of a knock sensor for the engine management system in 1985 allowed an increase in compression and a more aggressive spark timing map in the ECM. As a result power increased for the 1985 models to 165 hp (123 kW) from the 150 hp (112 kW) rating in 1984.

L69

Years: 1983-1986

The L69 was the last true H.O. engine. The High Output 5 L (305 cu in) , featuring higher compression of 9.5:1 with heads of the to-be-discontinued LU5 Cross-Fire fuel injection engine, and utilizing camshaft and 4" catalytic converter of the 5.7 L (350 cu in) L83 which was used on the Corvette of 1982 and 1984. Complete with a 2.75 inch exhaust system, topped by a recalibrated 4-barrel carburetor, dual snorkel air cleaner assembly, aluminum intake manifold, aluminum flywheel, electric cooling fan, and furthermore a knock sensor including more aggressive spark timing, this engine produced 190 hp (142 kW) @ 4800 and 240 lb·ft (325 N·m) of torque @ 3200 rpm. In most cases, being mated to a 3.73 or 3:42 ratio limited slip rear axle and a T5 5-speed or 700R4 automatic, this engine provided its driver with a wide range of rpm to play in.

LE9

Years: 1981-1986

The LE9 5 L (305 cu in) was the truck/van version of the High Output 305. It also had flattop pistons for a 9.5:1 compression ratio, the "929" truck 350 camshaft for more torque, 14022601 casting heads featuring 1.84/1.50" valves and 53 cc chambers, a specially calibrated 4bbl Q-Jet, the hybrid centrifugal/vacuum advance distributor with ESC knock sensor setup, and lower restriction exhaust. The engine made 210 hp (157 kW) @ 4,600 and 250 lb·ft (339 N·m) @ 2,000 rpm.

L03

Years: 1987-95

The L03 was the "low output" 5 L (305 cu in) (compared to the 305 TPI LB9). It produced 170 hp (127 kW) and 255 lb·ft (346 N·m) of torque (190 hp (142 kW) at 4,400 rpm and 275 lb·ft (373 N·m) at 2,400 in 1993-1995 GM trucks). This engine used throttle-body fuel injection. The TBI uses a unique injector firing scheme, for every rotation of the engine, each injector fired twice.

LB9

Years: 1985-1992

Introduced in 1985, the LB9 was the first Chevrolet small block to have tuned-port fuel injection (TPI). It was introduced with 215 hp (160 kW) and 275 lb·ft (373 N·m) and varied between 190 hp (142 kW)-230 hp (172 kW) (with 275 lb·ft (373 N·m)-300 lb·ft (407 N·m) of torque) over the years offered. It was an option on all 1985-1992 Chevrolet Camaro & Pontiac Firebird models.

350
Not to be confused with Buick V8 engine, Oldsmobile V8 engine, or Pontiac V8 engine.

The first generation of Chevrolet small-blocks began with the 1955 Chevrolet 265 cu in (4.3 L) V8. But it was the 350 cu in (5.7 L) series that came to be emblematic of the Chevrolet small block V8 engine. The engine's physical dimensions (oversquare 4.00-inch bore and 3.48-inch stroke, 102 mm by 88 mm) are nearly identical to the 400 hp (298 kW) LS2 engine of today, but much has changed. It is by far the most widely used Chevrolet small-block; it has been installed in everything from station wagons to sports cars, in commercial vehicles, and even in boats and (in highly modified form) airplanes.

First usage of the 350 was in the 1967 Chevrolet Camaro and 1968 Nova producing 295 horsepower (gross); other Chevrolet vehicle lines followed suit in the year 1969.

The GM Goodwrench 350 crate engine comes in several variations. The lowest priced uses the pre-1986 four-bolt casting molds with two dipstick locations; pre-1980 on the driver's side and post-1980 on the passenger's side. This engine was produced in Mexico since 1981 as the Targetmaster 350, and now the GM Goodwrench 350.

ZQ3

Years: 1969, 1970, 1972-1975

The ZQ3 was the standard engine in the 1969-1970 Chevrolet Corvette. It was a 300 hp (224 kW) version of the 350 cu in (5.7 L) small-block, with 10.25:1 compression and hydraulic lifters. It used a Rochester "4MV" Quadra-Jet 4-barrel carburetor. This was the first block produced that featured the larger 2.45 inch main bearing versus the older 2.30 inch main bearing in 1968/1969.

The 1969 ZQ3 produced 200 hp (149 kW) and 300 lb·ft (407 N·m) with 8.5:1 compression, dropping another 10 hp (7 kW) in 1973. 1975 saw the ZQ3 at 165 hp (123 kW) and 255 lb·ft (346 N·m).

L46

Years: 1969, 1970

The L46 was an optional engine on the 1969-1970 Chevrolet Corvette. It was a 350 hp (261 kW), 380 lb·ft (515 N·m) version of the ZQ3 with higher 11:1 compression.

LT-1
LT-1 from a 1970 Chevrolet Camaro Z28

Years: 1970-1972

The LT-1 was the ultimate 350 cu in (5.7 L) V8, becoming available in 1970. It used solid lifters, 11:1 compression, a high-performance camshaft, and a Holley four-barrel carburetor on a special aluminum intake to produce 370 hp (276 kW) and 380 lb·ft (515 N·m). It was available on the Corvette and Camaro Z28. Power was down in 1971 to 330 hp (246 kW) and 360 lb·ft (488 N·m) with 9:1 compression, and again in 1972 (the last year of the LT-1) to 255 hp (190 kW) and 280 lb·ft (380 N·m).

There was also a later small-block engine called the "LT1".

L48

Years: 1967-1980

The L-48 is the original 350 cu in (5.7 L), available only in the Camaro or Chevy II/Nova in '67 & '68. In '69 it was used in almost everything; Camaros, Corvettes, Impalas, Chevelles & Novas. From '75-'80 it was available only in the Corvette. L-48's use a Hyd Cam, 4bbl Qjet, Cast pistons, 2 bolt main caps, "Pink" Rods, #0014 Blocks & #993 heads. Power output ranges from 300HP(gross) down to 175HP(net).

The L48 was the standard engine in the 1971 Chevrolet Corvette. It produced 270 hp (201 kW) and 360 lb·ft (488 N·m) with an 8.5:1 compression ratio.

The 1976-1979 L48 was the standard Corvette engine and produced 180 hp (134 kW) and 270 lb·ft (366 N·m). The 1980 L48 stood at 190 hp (142 kW) and 280 lb·ft (380 N·m) from 8.2:1 compression.

In 1972 the only way to get a L48 (4bbl V8) in a Chevy Nova was to get the Super Sport Package. This is indicated by the 5th digit in the VIN being a "K". 1972 was the only year you could verify the Super Sport package by the VIN.

In 1973 the "L-48" had cold air induction (throttle activated) and developed 190 hp (142 kW) (net). Beginning in 1974 the hp was reduced for several years until it reached a low of 165 hp (123 kW) (net) in 1975, before rising again.

L82

Years: 1973-1980

The 1973-1974 L82 was a "performance" version of the 350 producing 250 hp (186 kW) and 285 lb·ft (386 N·m) from 9:1 compression. It was down to 205 hp (153 kW) and 255 lb·ft (346 N·m) for 1975. It was the optional engine again in 1976-1977, producing 5 hp (4 kW) more. The 1978 L82 recovered somewhat, producing 220 hp (164 kW) and 260 lb·ft (353 N·m), and then 5 hp (4 kW) and 10 lb·ft (14 N·m) more for 1979. 1980 saw yet another 10 hp (7 kW) and 15 lb·ft (20 N·m).

L81

Years: 1981

The L81 was the only 5.7 L (350 cu in) Corvette engine for 1981. It produced 190 hp (142 kW) and 280 lb·ft (380 N·m) from 8.2:1 compression, exactly the same as the 1980 L48, but added computer control spark advance, replacing the vacuum advance.

L83

Years: 1982, 1984

The 1982 L83 was again the only Corvette engine (and only available with an automatic transmission) producing 200 hp (149 kW) and 285 lb·ft (386 N·m) from 9:1 compression. This was again the only engine on the new 1984 Vette, at 205 hp (153 kW) and 290 lb·ft (393 N·m). The L83 added Cross-Fire fuel injection (twin throttle-body fuel injection).

L98

    For the new Generation IV V8, see GM L98.

Years: 1985-1992

The new 1985 L98 added tuned-port fuel injection "TPI", which produced 230 hp (172 kW) and 330 lb·ft (447 N·m). It was standard on all 1985-1991 Corvettes (rated at 230 hp (172 kW)-250 hp (186 kW) and 330 lb·ft (447 N·m)-350 lb·ft (475 N·m)). Optional on 87-92 Chevrolet Camaro & Pontiac Firebird models (rated at 225 hp (168 kW)-245 hp (183 kW) and 330 lb·ft (447 N·m)-345 lb·ft (468 N·m)) 1987 versions had 10 hp (7 kW) and 15 lb·ft (20 N·m) more thanks to 9.5:1 compression. Compression was up again in 1991 to 10:1 but output stayed the same.

LM1

The LM1 is the base 5.7 L (350 cu in) with a 4-barrel carburetor (usually with a Rochester Quadrajet) in passenger cars until 1988. Throughout its lifespan, it received either a points, electronic, and/or computer-controlled spark system, to conventional and feedback carburetors.

LM1s were superseded with the LO5 powerplant after 1988.

L05

The L05 was introduced in 1987 for use in Chevrolet/GMC trucks in both the GMT400 (introduced in April 1987 as 1988 models) and the R/V series trucks such as the K5 Blazer, Suburban, and rounded-era pickups formerly classed as the C/K until 1996 which includes chassis cabs and 4-door crew cabs. Although usage was for trucks, vans, and 9C1-optioned Caprices, the L05 was also used with the following vehicles:

    * 1992/1993 Buick Roadmaster sedan and station wagon
    * 1991/1992 Cadillac Brougham (optional engine)
    * 1993 Cadillac Fleetwood
    * 1992/1993 Chevrolet Caprice Wagon (optional engine)
    * 1993 Chevrolet Caprice LTZ
    * 1992 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser Wagon (optional engine)

L05 usage was replaced by the GM LT1 after 1993 in GM B-Bodies until production ceased in 1996.

In mid 1996 the L05 was equipped with Vortec heads used in the 1996 G30.

L31

The L31 replaced the LO5 in 1996 - known as the Vortec 5700. Known as the GEN 1+, this was the final incarnation of the 1955-vintage small block, ending production in 2005 with the last vehicle being a Kodiak/Topkick HD truck. Volvo Penta and Mercury Marine still produces the L31. The "MARINE" intake is a potential upgrade for L31 trucks.