10 Movies Roger Ebert Hated in the ’80s

by

Known as one of the most influential movie critics is Roger Ebert, who worked with the Chicago Sun-Times. Many people recognize him by his “thumbs up, thumbs down” rating system that he used alongside Gene Siskel and later Richard Roeper. However, to film enthusiasts and directors, Ebert was appreciated for his sincere and fervent opinions about movies. His reviews frequently encouraged audiences to watch the films he endorsed, and he backed several filmmakers before they achieved success, such as Martin Scorsese and Spike Lee.

Although Roger Ebert is widely recognized for his critical film reviews, his negative ones were particularly noteworthy. They were blunt, biting, and even amusing, offering more entertainment than the films they criticized. With witty quips and a touch of sarcasm, Ebert dismantled movies with humor that had audiences laughing out loud. The popularity of his scathing reviews led to him publishing books dedicated to them, such as “I Hated, Hated, Hated This Movie” (2000) and “Your Movie Sucks” (2007).

Here are 10 movies from the 1980s that Roger Ebert really, really hated.

10
‘The Blue Lagoon’ (1980)

Ebert’s score: 1.5/4 stars

The novel “The Blue Lagoon,” penned by Henry De Vere Stacpoole in 1908, portrays a heartwarming romance between two young cousins who find themselves stranded on a beautiful tropical island during the Victorian era. This tale encompasses aspects of love, growth, drama, survival, and more, making it a unique blend of genres. In this adaptation, a young Brooke Shields is among the stars.

Despite raking in significant profits, placing it among the top 9 highest-grossing films of 1980, “The Blue Lagoon” was met with severe criticism by critics. In his assessment, Ebert labeled it as the most intellectually vacant film of the year and found the movie’s conclusion particularly problematic. He expressed that the film failed to deliver a satisfying ending, stating, “The movie shies away: The task of crafting an ending seemed too daunting for such a weak production.” On his website, “The Blue Lagoon” made it onto Ebert’s list of most despised films.

9
‘Halloween III: Season of the Witch’ (1982)

Ebert’s score: 1.5/4 stars

Halloween III: Season of the Witch stands out as the eccentric relative in the Halloween series, as it deviated from the traditional storyline. Originally, the creators aimed to phase out Michael Myers, the central antagonist from the first two films, and transform Halloween into an anthology film series, where each installment would focus on a unique horror aspect, all set on Halloween night. Unlike the earlier movies that centered around a serial killer, Season of the Witch delved into you’ve got it witchcraft. Notably, Season of the Witch is the only film in the Halloween series without Michael Myers, but this anthology concept was abandoned after the release of Halloween III due to underwhelming box office returns and negative critical feedback.

One significant issue that Roger Ebert raised about the movie was his confusion regarding the villain’s purpose, as he pondered, “What’s his aim? To murder children and replace them with robots? Why?” This questionable plot point seemed fitting for the film “Halloween III,” a budget thriller from the very start. It belongs to the category of movies that follow a familiar pattern from other, more successful films. Despite being on Ebert’s list of least favorite films, “Halloween III: Season of the Witch” has developed a dedicated fanbase among “Halloween” enthusiasts since its debut in 1982.

8
‘Staying Alive’ (1983)

Ebert’s score: 1/4 stars

1983’s “Staying Alive” serves as the follow-up to the 1977 blockbuster movie, “Saturday Night Fever.” Written and directed by Sylvester Stallone, it features John Travolta reprising his role as Tony Manero. The story takes place six years after the original film, where Tony strives to make it big on Broadway as a dancer. Despite its title suggesting otherwise, this movie was heavily panned by film critics, with Ebert being one of them.

In his critique, he expressed his dissatisfaction by stating, “‘Staying Alive’ falls short.” He described the film as a glossy, commercially-driven cinematic production, more akin to a music video than a movie. It consists of separate song and dance segments that could potentially be played indefinitely on MTV, which seems to be its intended fate. Like ‘Flashdance’, it appears less like a full-fledged motion picture, but rather an endless sequence of musical interludes, with substantial dramatic scenes seemingly absent.

The film “Staying Alive” is notoriously disliked by many critics, including Ebert, and it has an exceptionally poor rating of 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, which makes it the oldest movie on their site with this score. This places it among the most poorly received sequels in film history.

7
‘Flashdance’ (1983)

Ebert’s score: 1/4 stars

The movie “Flashdance” is a dance-romance that tells the story of a passionate young dancer who dreams of becoming a professional ballerina. However, it received harsh criticism from Roger Ebert when he reviewed “Staying Alive,” calling it a stray bullet and further condemning it in his 1983 review. He wrote, “‘Flashdance’ is like a movie that won a free 90-minute shopping spree at the Hollywood supermarket.” The result, according to Ebert, was “great sound and dance sequences, but they meant nothing.” “Flashdance” made it onto Ebert’s list of most hated films.

Regardless of unfavorable reviews from Ebert and other critics, the movie Flashdance proved to be a massive box office hit in 1983, ranking third in total earnings for that year. The film served as an influence for popular dance movies like Footloose and Purple Rain. Its soundtrack generated multiple chart-topping songs, such as “Maniac” and the Academy Award-winning “Flashdance… What a Feeling.” Flashdance is widely recognized as one of the most enduring dance films from the 1980s.

6
‘Like Father, Like Son’ (1987)

Ebert’s score: 1/4 stars

In the movie “Like Father, Like Son“, a strict doctor and his easygoing son find themselves in each other’s bodies following the consumption of an enigmatic elixir. Essentially, this is similar to the plot of “Freaky Friday” – but with a significant twist: it’s far from being amusing or enjoyable, as noted by Roger Ebert.

In their critique, both Ebert and Gene Siskel harshly criticized the film “Like Father, Like Son,” labeling it as a “comedy disguising a cheap marketing decision.” In his review, Ebert further explained that the movie was one of the most pathetic comedies he had ever encountered. He went on to say that the film’s premise was flawed and didn’t work at all, making everyone in the movie seem uncomfortable and ridiculous. Instead of feeling like a genuine movie, it seemed more like punishment for the losers on a game show.

5
‘Critters 2: The Main Course’ (1988)

Ebert’s score: 1/4 stars

The franchise known as “Critters” is another horror series, but it’s much more humorous and exaggerated compared to the mentioned “Hellraiser” series. Similar to “Hellraiser,” a sequel was approved following the 1986 film, “Critters,” becoming a hit at the box office. Two years after the initial movie, the sequel titled “Critters 2: The Main Course” unleashes a fresh wave of ravenous aliens on a nearby town.

Due to its poor performance at the box office, it marks the end of the franchise’s theatrical releases – a positive development for Roger Ebert, who intensely disliked this movie. Another entry on his list of most despised films, Ebert viciously criticized _Critters 2: The Main Course_, remarking in his review, “It lacks all the style and fun of the original ‘Critters’ (1986) and serves no purpose.” He denounced the film as a “lack of imagination” and asserted that it had no reason to exist.

In a nutshell, the creators of this movie seemed to rely solely on ideas from the original film, indicating they were intent on making a copycat production. Given that there’s likely to be a “Critters 3,” I’d like to generously share my creative concepts for free with whoever is tasked with its creation. My compensation will come when I no longer have to endure another remake of this worn-out content. If it’s possible to dedicate the film to me, that would be a pleasant gesture.

4
‘Cyborg’ (1989)

Ebert’s score: 1/4 stars

As a supporter, if I were to rephrase the given text in a natural and easy-to-read manner from first person perspective, it would be:

In a world where cyberpunk and martial arts collide, I find myself standing before 1989’s movie “Cyborg.” Starring Jean-Claude Van Damme as a tough mercenary fighting against a ruthless gang in a dystopian future, this film was a moderate hit at the box office. However, it didn’t receive the same level of critical acclaim, giving birth to two sequels that continued the story.

Roger Ebert started off his critique by sharing that he erupted in laughter at the film’s initial dialogue, barely 30 seconds into it. Unfortunately, things went from bad to worse. The movie ‘Cyborg’ found a place on Ebert’s list of most despised films. In his review, Ebert commented, “Films like this succeed when they keep up an intense pace and showcase creativity, as the Mad Max series does. However, they fail when they relax their defenses and reveal the truth: that several actors in peculiar costumes seem uncomfortable while delivering awkward dialogue.

3
‘Hellbound: Hellraiser II’ (1988)

Ebert’s score: 0.5/4 stars

As a devoted fan, I can’t help but reminisce about the remarkable impact of the 1987 supernatural horror masterpiece, “Hellraiser.” This film gave birth to a franchise that spanned over a decade, with a total of 11 films. The first sequel and the second installment in this chilling series is none other than “Hellbound: Hellraiser II.”

Picking up where the original left off, this movie follows a character we recognize from the first film, now ensnared in a psychiatric hospital. Here, an obsessive doctor with a penchant for the occult sets free the terrifying Cenobites from their demonic realm. Much like its predecessor, “Hellbound: Hellraiser II” was a box office success and paved the way for yet another sequel in this spine-tingling franchise.

The movie wasn’t received favorably by critics, particularly not by Roger Ebert, who included it in his Least Favorite list. He severely criticized Hellbound: Hellraiser II in his review, stating, “This film lacks a traditional narrative. It is merely a sequence of gruesome and violent scenes linked together like a collection by a twisted special effects artist…That makes ‘Hellbound: Hellraiser II’ a perfect movie for audiences with limited taste and weak concentration spans who only need to occasionally check the screen to confirm that something is still playing.” Ouch.

2
‘She’s Out of Control’ (1989)

Ebert’s score: 0/4 stars

The movie titled “She’s Out of Control” is a self-reliant, growing-up comedy with a comical twist. It revolves around a protective father who becomes overly concerned when his teenage daughter undergoes a significant transformation. This film had some promising elements such as the presence of ’80s icon Tony Danza and music by renowned composer Alan Silvestri. However, it failed to resonate with audiences, barely covering its production costs at the box office. Additionally, it received even less favorable reviews from critics.

In their review, Ebert Ebert and Gene Siskel gave the film “She’s Out of Control” an exceptional low rating of zero out of four stars. Ebert expresses his exasperation by asking, “What world did the creators of this movie inhabit?” He further questions, “What beliefs do they hold about the essence and standards of life? I inquire because ‘She’s Out of Control’ is an unusual production – it seems to be constructed entirely from tired sitcom tropes and artificial lifestyles, with no connection to any recognizable reality.

1
‘Last Rites’ (1988)

Ebert’s score: 0/4 stars

This thrilling movie, titled “Last Rites,” tells the story of a young, virtuous priest who finds himself in a precarious situation, torn between his religious vows, his feelings for a New York mobster’s mistress, and his loyalty to the mobster’s wife, who is also his own sister. The film was the creative work of Donald P. Bellisario, who wrote, produced, and directed it. However, it seems that “Last Rites” didn’t fare well in terms of both commercial success and critical acclaim, which might be why it was Bellisario’s only directorial endeavor.

Roger Ebert strongly disliked the movie “Last Rites.” In fact, his review begins with a very critical statement: “Here it is – found at last and with only six weeks to spare – the worst film of 1988.” And he doesn’t hold back from there. Ebert goes on to heavily criticize the film, calling it not just poor filmmaking, but also offensive. He further states that it offends his intelligence. Ebert suggests that many films are bad, but only a few suggest themselves as the work of people lacking taste, judgment, reason, tact, morality, and common sense. In other words, it seems as though no one involved in this project had any concern for the quality of their work or the impact it might have on audiences. To put it mildly, “Last Rites” has earned a spot on Ebert’s list of most hated films.

Read More

2025-04-13 04:06