The Five Worst Films of 2019

It's that time of year again. The time where film critics recall the films of the previous year, listing the best, worst, and the hidden gems, my personal, however unoriginal, inclusion. Seeing as I prefer saving the best for last, let us begin with the worst.

I'm not one to recount the worst films of the year for the sake of recounting the worst films of the year. Counting down the good and the bad is a symbiotic relationship, as one cannot know one without the other. Sure, that means shaming the work of filmmakers, who, though we joke otherwise, did dedicate many hours to that particular film. Still, if there's a film that made you angry, it's fair to explain why that was, as you having tastes is part of your individuality. There are the worst lists that criticize simply to criticize, but I hope you find my words constructive.

With that out of the away, it's time for me to share what I consider the worst films of 2019.

5. Breakthrough

Though "Breakthrough" may be based on an inspirational true story, I feel the film adaptation completely missed that, as it's not only formulaic, but also oddly mean-spirited.

Beneath many of the main characters, there's an underlying sense of condescension and blind self-righteousness that kept me from caring about them. Seeing as the character drama is the core element of this film, that's a huge problem. Ideally, characters like these learn to better themselves over the course of the story, but by the end, I didn't feel like much had changed at all.

This film runs at almost two hours, when it could've easily been a solid hour and a half. Instead, "Breakthrough" pads itself with unnecessary conflicts, an out-of-place song number, and internal character drama that we've seen in countless other faith-based films. Because we've heard this same message so many times before, it's difficult for this film to stand out. As is, this not only blends in with other faith-based films, but falls towards the bottom of the heap. That's a shame, because this is a great story. "Breakthrough" does ask interesting questions, ones that pertain to why some are saved from incredible accidents while others just die. Unfortunately, these are asked during the film's final moments. Had the story been more balanced and focused, not to mention the characters being likable, "Breakthrough" could've been something special. Wasted potential indeed.

4. Gemini Man

Ang Lee is a great director and the concept of "Gemini Man" could have made for an interesting character piece as well as thrilling action film. Unfortunately, Lee and his team of writers chose to squander a great idea, opting instead to make the blandest film ever, filled with old tropes and dated writing. Will Smith may have one or two genuine acting moments here, but with no support from the writers, he fails at trying to make compelling characters out of Henry and Junior.

If you read news about this film online ahead of its release, you likely heard about how technologically advanced it was according to Ang Lee. As it turned out, Lee made something so advanced that no stateside theater could show it in its full-intended form. No matter what format you paid to see "Gemini Man" in, you were getting an incomplete theatrical experience. As someone who forwent all the bells and whistles, the action and effects were a complete letdown. Everything was slow, nothing about it impressed, and the lack of investment didn't help matters.

Add cringe-worthy one-liners, distracting product placement, and "Gemini Man" is a disappointment. One day, hopefully, Lee can produce an action thriller that delivers on its promise, but it'll take more effort on the script to do so.

3. Men in Black: International

A few months ago, I thought of "Men in Black: International" as a run-of-the-mill bad movie. After rewatching the original "Men in Black," though, my disdain for this movie significantly raised, earning it the number three spot on this list.

Tessa Thompson and Chris Hemsworth are a great pair and this film would've benefitted from their involvement had it not opted to recycle the duo's routine from the Marvel Universe. The two play Agent M and Agent H like they do Valkyrie and Thor. Here they're wielding neuralizers as opposed to swords and axes. The script simply believes that just putting the two on screen together will equal movie magic. It forgets that direction is required in order to achieve such status. As a result, their chemistry doesn't register that much and their comedy falls flat despite the added inclusion of Kumail Nanjiani.

Because I know how inventive a "Men in Black" movie can be, it's utterly baffling to see a soft-reboot content with being so lazy. There are plenty of original concepts in "International," but such examples are glossed over because the filmmakers favor their generic, end-of-the-world plot, something that the MIB franchise has done one too many times. With F. Gary Gray directing and not OG trilogy helmer Barry Sonnenfeld, I wanted the series to take on a new identity. There are glimpses of something new here, yet such instances are fleeting.

I doubt this failure will keep the franchise down for long. If Sony can take another crack at "Ghostbusters" so soon after their 2016 misfire, then I suspect a similar future awaits for "Men in Black." Maybe they'll bring back Will Smith, Tommy Lee Jones, and Sonnenfeld. Maybe they'll bring in a whole new cast or crew. Maybe they'll do a mix. Whatever it is, it has to be better than this flop.

2. The Secret Life of Pets 2

Here's the thing. I didn't see "Uglydolls" or "Arctic Dogs." I could tell those were DOA from their trailers alone. So, having written that, why would I consider "The Secret Life of Pets 2" to be the worst animated film of the year when I haven't seen those other films, which are supposedly worse.

Because Illumination Entertainment operates at a higher level than, say, STX Entertainment or Entertainment Studios Motion Pictures, they have more of a responsibility to deliver quality products, especially when two of their films have grossed over a billion dollars. While some of their films are fun, Illumination's seems to be content being good, even at their best, when they could be great. To me, few of them have deserved the high box office returns that they have received in the past, yet others seem to enjoy them, which I respect. With such an immense fanbase, you would think Illumination would reward them with more quality feature films, but "The Secret Life of Pets 2" is a new low for the studio.

This time, as many others have already outlined, they've resorted to sloppily stitching together three elongated short films and calling that a full-length feature. Clearly, it did not work, as the film earned less than half of what the original did, a film I equally dislike, but I digress. The voice cast is uninspired, the laughs are nonexistent, and the message is so barebones, one needn't watch the entire film to guess what it is. The animation is good, which makes me question why such effort was wasted on a story as apathetic as this. This isn't the last we've seen of Illumination and I think they could seriously impro...(sees their next release is "Minions 2"). I'm sure it'll be... fine.

1. The Lion King (2019)

A budget between $250-260 million, the voices of Donald Glover, Seth Rogen, Chiwetel Ejiofer, and James Earl Jones, to name a few, the directing talents of Jon Favreau, and the musical abilities of Hans Zimmer. This much and more was afforded to a pointless endeavor, known as "The Lion King" (2019).

Like "Beauty and the Beast" (2017) before it, "The Lion King" (2019) is awful because it fails to understand what made the animated original so powerful. It's a remake that is confused on what path it should take. Should it be a shot-for-shot remake, or should it be it's own thing? Consequently, the film chooses to follow both paths and while this is a bad idea on paper, what makes the situation even worse is that neither side is executed properly.

The scene-by-scene retelling part misses or outright omits key story elements, while the scenes added actually take away from the experience. They're just showing how a character or a thing got from Point A to Point B. How did Scar catch the mouse? The mouse crawled there. How did Simba's fur get to Rafiki, inadvertently letting Rafiki know Simba was still alive? It arrived despite apparently being eaten and crapped out by a giraffe. How did Nala escape Pride Rock? She did so and in a very pretentious way I might add. (Fun Fact: Nala's escape was going to be a scene in the animated film, but the filmmakers got rid of it partially because they felt that it took too long.) In the end, the only contribution these additions make is further stretching the runtime.

Another big part of why this film fails is the CGI. While impressive in scope and scale, to get into this story, you have to buy the animals and their humanlike natures. Because the CG is made to look realistic, any line they say and any expression they convey is fake. Most of these designs are so ill-equipped for this task that the scenes they're in come across as awkward and even laughable rather than dramatic and poignant. Additionally, the color is drained from most environments, so you no longer feel the beauty of this African-based story.

Later in 2019, Jon Favreau produced Disney's best "Star Wars" endeavor with season one of "The Mandalorian," so I'm no longer sure if he's to blame for this. Maybe his hands were tied by the suits, or maybe his filmmaking efforts thrive when he's the one making up the stories and characters. Who knows? I suppose I'll end this overview the way I ended my review: that "Mulan" remake looks terrific. Please don't disappoint me again, Disney.

Conclusion

This has been my list of the worst films of 2019. I hope you enjoyed it. Share your thoughts in the comments below as well as your own list. Thank you for reading, I'm Dallin, your resident film fanatic, and I'll return soon with another review.