Even Cowgirls Get the Blues : All time WORST movie!

This was, as you all know, based on a novel by Tom Robbins. The novel was FABULOUS, and this film was a slap-in-the-face insult to the book. I mean, some really good books have been made into mediocre movies before, but this is a new low in bad. I could have taken a $100,000 budget and a bunch of porno actors and made an X rated version which would have been more true to the book.

If I could afford to indulge my own eccentricities, I would buy a copy of this on DVD so I could urinate on it in symbolic gesture of how offended I was by it.

If I were Tom Robbins, I would drag Gus Van Sant out of his house and piss on him too. Of course, he might like that.... This movie should have been nixed at several points during production. SOMEONE should have said "Oh my God! This movie stinks and should not be made!!!!!"

--Seven

ok, i'll admit that i haven't seen "even cowgirls get the blues", but it can't be nearly as bad as "ax 'em". which is the worst movie ever made. once you see "ax 'em", you will realise that nothing else even comes close to being 'the worst movie ever'.

You haven't seen the movie. Your argument is invalid.

http://us.imdb.com/name/nm2339870/

This movie sucks more than anything that has ever sucked before, or after.

Hey! Ax 'em is on youTube!

Well, it's Saturday Night, my ISP is flyin', the popcorn is poppin' and I'm about to settle in to enjoy this wonderfully choreographed and finely-tuned masterpiece of a film, one that belongs to the ages - yes... Ax 'Em!! Here I come...

😁

I agree - but unforgettable, on the other hand?

"I don't know about what happened . . . because once you start writing, it all becomes fiction."

I believe this is the ONLY one lesbian movie made me sick and wanted to vomit, especially the masturbation part and actors' poor acting. And plus, I couldn't stand it and it bored me too much that I wanted to stop watching it. Finally, when I was half-sleepy half conscious, I finished the goddamned "disturbing" scenes.

I don't know why the hell Uma was in this movie too, I bet either she or her agent was crazy. It's even worse than Final Analysis, The Avengers and Batman & Robin which were considered as Uma's worst MOVIES.(however, her performance in Final Analysis was great, she was the only one who got praises and didn't stink). Holy god, I don't know how come an openly gay director could make such a sucky homosexual film! I despise him!

I have seen a WORST MOVIE EVER post on almost every single board on the IMDb. Can't you either think of something original or go see some more movies? There ARE worse out there. Sheesh

For Connie n Raymond Marble, it was the beginning of the end!

I would agree that, in my opinion, it's one of the worst movies that I've seen, mainly because I've read the book at least 3 times. Though I'm sure it's not completely the movie's fault. Tom Robbins has such a different style of writing. I imagine it would be really hard to make a screen adaptation of his books. They should have just left it alone to make another Stephen King made-for-tv stinker.

I really loved this movie. But i havn't read the book so i wasn't aware of differences etc. I thought Rain Phoenix acted beautifully as well as John Hurt who was just classic. I love movies that are slighty wacky so this movie sure did it for me.

I cannot fathom how you watched any of Rain's monologues or dialogue and thought that it was good acting.

http://us.imdb.com/name/nm2339870/

I too have seen a WORST MOVIE EVER post on every single board. However this time I actually believe it aplies! I saw this with an open mind too, didn't even read or know about the book. This was a decade ago and I still want my money back!!

Well, there is always something worse than something. But this is really a bad one, I agree, although I am a Gus Van Sant fan.
I did like the first, like 15 minutes, though. The kid and the weird family, and how Sissy frees herself...I thought that had some sweetness about it...but then it only got worse and worse.

I've tried real hard on a number of occasions to rewatch this movie and try to find SOME redeeming quality in it. I've failed miserably. It has nothing to do with content. It has to do with just being a sucky movie.
The book was a masterpiece. This was and is not a masterpiece.

Morbo: Kittens give Morbo gas.

I was very surprised when i found out that the book "Even the cowgirls get the blues" was made a movie. My question was "who would dare to transfer a Tom Robbins book to a movie". And someone did; and it was awful!
(And the actress who played Bonanza was awful)

In the book the exact size of Sissy's thumbs is not mentioned. Robbins creates a mystery around them allowing your imagination to travel, i can say its one of the book's hot points.
AND SUDDENLY SOMEONE MAKES THAT A MOVIE!!! AND HE GIVES AN IMAGE FOR THAT!!!
GGGGRRRRGGGGRGRGRGGRG!!!!.....

If you have not seen the movie, i suggest you to read the book first.
After you read the book i suggest you not to see the movie (try to win your curiosity)

"Of course, he might like that..."

Tom? Or Gus?

The novel was sublime? Why would anyone EVER try to make a movie out of a Tom Robbins novel?

I thought it was bad too, but it was definetly memorable, and completely off the wall, which made me laugh at how crazy it was, and I had a good time watching it.

Absolutely, 100%, no shadow of a doubt, the WORST EVER MOVIE. I hated it. Every god forsaken minute of it. I watched it about a decade ago, and still now, i find my mind periodically wandering, and recalling just how awful if was, in every sense of the word.

Honestly, I cannot describe how bad this film is.

It was pretty bad. I had to watch it in 3 different segments, I can't imagine sitting all the way through it for an hour and a half.
Will you keep it down? I'm trying to do drugs!

...could one of you explain actually WHY this is such a bad movie?...
and afterwards tell me, if it's SO bad why starting this thread at all?
I know this movie is pretty weird, and I really don't mind critics, but it should be founded :)

it's worth talking about something so bad because the book was so good. they're such opposite extremes. an AMAZING book and an ATROCIOUS movie. the book is kind of complex and there's a lot to the story... when i first heard there was a movie version, i didn't really believe it. i thought "how the hell did they make a movie out of THAT? is it like 4 hours long?", which is funny cause i guess it originally was really long and more true to the book, but it was just too long for theatrical release. so they cut. and cut. and cut. until the story was pretty much gone and all that was left was these badly acted scenes loosely strung together. i don't know how people who haven't read the book can even watch this; does it make any sense at all? i can't imagine it. i would absolutely kill to see the original uncut version, but i doubt it even exists.

i agree. but ive still yet to see alone in the dark...

what great expectations can do with a enraged fan eh?

trully, i watched this movie a couple of months ago. i always saw it on the video rental's, but i were never really curious about it. all of a sudden i'm at the rental's without a clue on wich movie i would be picking, when I saw this cover and thought "hm... I'll give it a try. who know?". like that, no expectations or nothing. after watching it I were like "well, not memorable, but i've seen a lot of things that are really worst.".

it really is not so bad.

This movie was great. I can't imagine tom being unhappy with it, and I can't imagine anyone who enjoys tom, being unhappy with it. for the person who said they would like to symbolically pee on the disk, I cant imagine some one whose heart is as tortured as yours obviously is ever enjoying a work by tom Robbins. don't be so critical and try to look for the beauty in life its all around you. If you want to see the negative you can, but why would you want to. Just put love into the world and see love in it and you'll be much happier.

Without a doubt 'Welcome to Woop Woop' is the Worst movie ever created. It's practically porn and has the stupidest plot line beyond ones imagination. When ever anyone mentions the words 'worst movie' i immediately think of this.

Give Quiche a chance

I'm not sure I'd say "worst movie ever", but it might be one of the worst adaptations of a novel ever filmed.

Guys, I know this thread isn't the most original one on IMDb, but really, you can't stand this movie, or can you?

I don't intend to be offensive, but I have to defend my opinions.

Considering that Tom Robbins is a smarmy, self-indulgent, hackneyed Rick Astley-looking 47th rate Berger/Pynchon/Vonnegut wannabe it's no surprise that a movie adapted from one of his books failed.

This film is far from perfect, but I actually found it enjoyable.

I've read the novel and it's fantastic, but people need to remember that the written word and the moving picture are such different mediums that they deserve to be treated as such... meaning a NOVEL and the MOVIE based on a novel are two completely separate works of art. It's not supposed to be a 100% literal translation of the novel. That is impossible.

As a whole, the movie may be a failure, but it's an interesting failure. Visually I thought it was great; beautifully photographed (no one seems to ever acknowledge this), with some great images (the vast shots of the West, the queen of spades on snake's tongue, Delores's third vision of the whooping cranes, etc.)

Plus Uma was superhot in this.

True dat.

Not even close to being the worst movie ever... but then again every movie has the same post on their boards. That said, I'm pretty sure if I had read the novel I would've liked this movie less.

"I did cramps the way Meryl Streep did accents" - Calliope (Middlesex)

This movie was horrible. I'd heard it was good and went to see it. After about 20 minute of "what the hell?", we walked out of the theater and into The Flinstones, and I don't regret our decision.

I have a theory as to why Gus Van Sant hired Keanu Reeves for this movie:

He wanted someone around with even less talent than himself.

He was going to use Ewe Bolle as the Countess, but Ewe evidently turned him down, as he didn't want to work with a hack like Van Sant.

Except that Gus van Sant is one of our best working directors, and is responsible for multiple great films both before and after this bomb.

And even with this film, it's not the directing (or the cinematography, or even the acting) that's wrong - it's the plot, or what's left of it after extensive editing. It may have worked in the novel, but the way the story is presented it never really becomes possible to accept some of the most overwhelmingly strange plot developments. Instead it's almost all just cringe-worthy. There are, however, thanks to the excellent technical aspects, rare moments that are quite tolerable, even enjoyable - which is more than can be said of any movies that are truly among the very worst.

You can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant

pretty darn close to worst ever

Lily Tomlin was supposed to be in it but walked off set early on. Smart lady!

Oh, now I see.. There are 3 kinds of "Worst movie ever" threads:

1- A small percentage, around 0.001%, of those threads are actually on the boards of the worst movies ever made. I'm not mentioning names, but you can always look at my voting history and check what has been rated 1/10.

2- The majority of such threads are on message boards for movies that, for some reason, justifiable or not, have annoyed a troll somehow. Nick Cage was wearing a blonde beard. Meryl Streep didn't show her boobs. The trucks on Transformers were GMs, not Toyotas. You guys know what I mean...

3- Actually more like a sub-category of #2. Movies with screenplays adapted from a popular book cause people to create such threads just so they can brag about the fact that they read books.

Seriously now, you guys that claim to be so intelligent because you know this or that author's work, be honest! You can't possibly be sincere when you say that a movie adaptation of a book you love is the worst movie ever made. If you love it so much, at least the fact that the book made it to the screens should lead you to rate it a 2/10. Therefore, not the worst ever.

I've read the same thing on the last [only?] adaptation for Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy message board. Later some friends that haven't read the book - or listened to the radio, watched the BBC series - also told me they've disliked the movie.

Sometimes I just don't get it. What do people expect from a movie? Sometimes I think you guys should keep the word Movies for yourselves, then people that think like me could engage on something completely different. We'd call it Cinema, Audiovisual Arts or something.

It just doesn't feel like we're talking about the same thing.

Gus Van Sant is a brilliant film maker...who is Tom Robbins? Maybe Van Sant should urinate on Robbins...

"IMdB; where 14 year olds can act like jaded 40 year old critics...'