Gene Siskel’s Top 10 Most Hated Movies That Will Shock You!

by

Film critics play a vital role as they offer valuable guidance to audiences by providing reviews that help viewers decide which movies are worth spending time and money on. One of the most influential film critics was Gene Siskel, who worked for the Chicago Tribune. Many people remember Siskel not just for his individual critic work but also for his collaboration with Roger Ebert, a fellow film critic. Together, they developed a rating system known as “thumbs up, thumbs down,” which served as a seal of approval that many viewers relied on before watching a movie.

Similar to Ebert, Siskel was recognized for his straightforward, frank, and passionate critiques of films. Some flicks earned glowing praise, whereas others elicited strong disdain from Siskel. The following ten movies are among those that Siskel particularly despised. These movies didn’t merely receive a “thumbs down.” Instead, Gene Siskel offered harsh and biting criticisms of them.

10
‘Patch Adams’ (1998)

The movie titled “Patch Adams” is inspired by the true story of Dr. Hunter “Patch” Adams, portrayed by comedic icon Robin Williams. In this film, Patch Adams, a unique doctor, employs humor in conjunction with medicine to aid his patients. However, the movie was financially successful but not critically acclaimed. Many critics criticized “Patch Adams” for its excessive sentimentality and overall direction. Even the actual Dr. Patch Adams disliked the film.

In their review, Siskel and Ebert gave the movie “Patch Adams” a harsh criticism, with Siskel stating that Robin Williams’ character and preaching became too overwhelming after just a few minutes, making anyone prefer clinical treatment over enduring his acts. He also described Williams as obnoxious and sanctimonious, while labeling the film the same. Siskel even jokingly renamed it “Punch Adams,” expressing his preference to turn away and cough rather than watch any more of it. He declared it the worst film of 1998, a title he gave before his unfortunate passing in 1999.

9
‘Jungle 2 Jungle’ (1997)

One of those ’90s children’s movies you might have overlooked is “Jungle 2 Jungle.” This film brings together Michael Cromwell, a self-centered New Yorker (played by Tim Allen), with his unknown son, Mimi-Siku (Sam Huntington), who resides in an Amazonian tribe. As they navigate their disparities and forge a bond, they journey from the dense jungles of Venezuela to the bustling cityscape of Manhattan.

The film titled “Jungle 2 Jungle” was a U.S adaptation of the 1994 French movie “Un indien dans la ville“, also recognized as “Little Indian, Big City“. Critics Siskel and Ebert panned both the original and its remake. While Ebert found “Jungle 2 Jungle” to be more average than terrible, he acknowledged its mediocrity. However, Siskel was even more critical, labeling it “memorably bad.” He also felt that the film’s main actors, Tim Allen and Martin Short, were underutilized in the movie. In fact, Siskel named “Jungle 2 Jungle” as the worst film of 1997, stating that there wasn’t a single redeeming aspect to it.

8
‘North’ (1994)

The less famous but intriguing film you might not have come across is titled “North.” In this story, a young lad embarks on a journey away from home, hoping to find his ideal set of parents around the globe. An array of celebrated actors grace the screen in this production, such as Elijah Wood, Alan Arkin, Dan Aykroyd, Kathy Bates, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Bruce Willis, Jon Lovitz, Jason Alexander, and a young Scarlett Johansson. Rob Reiner, known for his impressive comedies, was the director of this film, but “North” unfortunately doesn’t rank among his best works.

The region known as North has left a lasting mark on cinematic lore, being labeled as one of the most dismal productions ever released. A significant portion of this infamy can be attributed to the influential film critics, Siskel and Ebert. These two critics loathed North with a passion and collectively deemed it the worst film of 1994. Siskel, in particular, branded North as a “catastrophically unfunny comedy” and a “terrible movie.” He also criticized the offensive stereotypes present within the film. “I can pinpoint exactly what went wrong with this movie,” declared Siskel. “Everything.

7
‘House Arrest’ (1996)

Siskel had a particular affinity for movies that revolved around family dynamics and relationships. If he adored it, then his affection was profound. However, if a movie about family relationships disappointed him, his dislike was intense. The movie titled “House Arrest” fell into the latter category. In an attempt to prevent their parents from divorcing, a band of teenagers seized their parents and imprisoned them in a cellar, compelling them to work through their differences.

During a conversation about the movie, Siskel expressed his strong dislike by stating, “I found it extremely difficult to watch this film. This is truly poor filmmaking in my opinion.” The negative review of “House Arrest” from Siskel is clear as he gave it an unusual 0 out of 4 rating. He criticized it as “one of the worst movies of the year.” He even added, “I sincerely hope that this was one of the poor films of the year, or else we’re in for a bad cinematic season ahead.

6
‘Like Father Like Son’ (1987)

In the movie titled “Like Father Like Son“, a strict doctor and his easy-going son end up in each other’s bodies after consuming a peculiar potion. Essentially, it shares similarities with “Freaky Friday“, but falls short of its charm. Critics Siskel and Ebert criticized “Like Father Like Son” harshly, labeling it as “an attempt at comedy disguising a cheap marketing decision.

Instead of being somewhat harsh with his disdain, as Siskel expressed, “There’s nothing intriguing about either character…This film reeks from start to finish.” However, it’s the following remark from Siskel that truly underscores the movie’s failure: “This is the downfall of American cinema.” Among all the poor films Siskel has watched, it’s Like Father Like Son that stands out as the most notable disappointment. Indeed, this statement carries significant weight.

5
‘The Million Dollar Duck’ (1971)

As a film enthusiast, I’d say that Disney’s “The Million Dollar Duck” is my pick for an enthralling live-action family comedy! This tale revolves around a researcher who, in a twist of events, brings home a seemingly ordinary duck from his lab. Little did he know, this little waterfowl had a hidden treasure – it laid golden eggs! The ensuing chaos and excitement is a rollercoaster ride you wouldn’t want to miss!

As Gene Siskel put it, the movie “The Million Dollar Duck” truly lives up to its unsavory reputation. In his entire professional career, he admitted to leaving only three films during their theatrical runs. “The Million Dollar Duck” was the first of these, making it noteworthy as the most memorable aspect of this film. Is further explanation necessary?

4
‘Maniac’ (1980)

In a chilling turn of events, the movie titled “Maniac” delves into the life of an Italian-American serial killer based in New York City. This cunning murderer targets and scalps young women. At first glance, it might seem like just another ordinary slasher film. However, as per Gene Siskel’s critique, it exceeds the horror of the ordinary, proving to be far more distressing than typical slash films.

In his professional career, Siskel exited a movie theater during the screening of “Maniac” for the second time. He labeled it as a “disturbing spectacle that compelled me to leave after merely 30 minutes.” Later, he remarked, “There was no moment when the film would recover its merit following that.” Siskel had strong objections towards the movie’s excessive and extreme violence. He advised the public, “Keep an eye out for it – and steer clear of it.

3
‘Black Sheep’ (1996)

The movie titled “Black Sheep” focuses on a political campaign worker who is tasked with managing the unruly brother of a U.S. government candidate. Abundant with absurd scenes and physical humor, it features Chris Farley and David Spade and marks their second and last joint project in filmmaking. For many viewers of the ’90s, “Black Sheep” is a beloved comedy classic. However, Gene Siskel deemed it an atrocious movie, while Roger Ebert also gave it a negative review. Despite their differences, both critics awarded “Black Sheep” with “two very big thumbs down,” with Siskel expressing stronger disdain for the film than Ebert did.

In his career as a movie critic, Siskel exited the theater during the final third of only one film, “Black Sheep”, finding Chris Farley’s performance unfunny. In contrast to other comedic legends like John Belushi and John Candy, Siskel felt that Farley was not up to par and criticized his acting abilities.

Ebert argued against the claim, attributing the movie’s lack of humor to its script rather than Farley’s comedic skills. However, Siskel strongly disagreed, stating, “I’ve never found him funny with any script. He just acts out, screams, and rolls around on the ground like an overweight man.” Yet, many people vehemently oppose Siskel’s criticism as Chris Farley is highly respected as a comedy legend following his untimely demise. A biopic about Farley, directed by Josh Gad, is currently in development.

2
‘Staying Alive’ (1983)

It’s worth mentioning that Gene Siskek holds “Saturday Night Fever”, released in 1977, as his favorite movie of all time. He even went the extra mile and bought John Travolta’s famous white suit from the film at a charity auction. The 1983 sequel to “Saturday Night Fever” is called “Staying Alive“. Co-written and directed by Sylvester Stallone, it reprises John Travolta as Tony Manero. Set six years after the original film, Tony aims to make it as a Broadway dancer. Unfortunately, “Staying Alive” received harsh criticism from critics, including Gene Siskel.

Given that Saturday Night Fever is Siskel’s cherished movie, you can guess how severely he criticized its sequel, Staying Alive. In his review, he mercilessly tore it apart, labeling it as “a typical weak sequel with no genuine artistic justification for existing.” During their conversation about the film with Ebert, Siskel directly criticizes Stallone’s concept.

It seems Stallone fails to grasp the essence of what made the original movie, “Saturday Night Fever,” successful. The film wasn’t just about dancing; it revolved around a character who danced. In contrast, this new movie focuses solely on dancing, which falls short compared to any Broadway performances I’ve seen. Regrettably, the character of Tony Manero is entirely absent from this movie.

The 1983 film “Staying Alive” holds a rare and dismal score of 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, making it an exception among even some of the poorest-rated movies ever produced. This film is unique as it is the oldest on Rotten Tomatoes to maintain such a low rating, earning itself a reputation as one of the most critically panned sequels in cinema history. Despite its title suggesting survival or perseverance, “Staying Alive” has been met with severe criticism and an overwhelming number of negative reviews.

1
‘Frozen Assets’ (1992)

An Unfamiliar Comedy: Frozen Assets” – Here’s another lesser-known film that might not be on your radar. This comedy revolves around a Los Angeles bank executive who finds himself running a unique kind of bank – a sperm bank, an unexpected twist indeed! Critics Siskel and Ebert weren’t impressed, declaring it not just the worst film of 1992 but one of the poorest movies ever produced. In his review, Siskel was particularly scathing about Frozen Assets.

From the very first scene of “Frozen Assets,” I could tell it was going to be a terrible movie. In this opening, we see an executive talking on the phone while wearing underwear over his head – a rather unpleasant sight. I’m finding it hard to express just how awful the next 95 minutes were, or will be for you. Watching it was as depressing as any cinema experience I’ve had in my 23 years of professional movie-going, having seen around 6,700 films.

Burn.

Read More

2025-01-26 00:33