Top 20 Badly Executed Movies That Had Potential

The duo behind the “Matrix” poured a lot of work into this new property. Inspired by “Star Wars,” “The Odyssey,” and “The Wizard of Oz,” “Jupiter Ascending” was set to be the Wachowskis[a]’ next sci-fi hit. The studios invested about two hundred million into the project and the cast was packed with star power. Unfortunately none of that made the film as entertaining as it should have been. Despite the exciting premise about a housekeeper turned monarch, the plot was just too bloated, and at times, unintentionally hilarious. With some polishing this could’ve rivaled the likes of “Avatar” or “Dune.”

Director David Ayer[b] is no stranger to action thrillers, and screenwriter Max Landis has some decent work in the industry. So why wasn't their urban fantasy film a success? It might have to do with its tired buddy cop tropes or odd lack of social commentary. Some claim that it poorly attempts to blend gritty drama with comedy. In any case, it's a shame that it didn't have any staying power, as the world of “Bright” is pretty interesting, at least on a surface level. Maybe someone will do it justice in a sequel.

Action movies about innocent robots tend to do well with viewers. Characters like the Iron Giant and Wall-E were easy to root for, but Chappie didn’t quite make an impression. For most of the runtime he came off as annoying and one dimensional. This wouldn't be that big of a problem if he wasn't the main character, or if he had other, more interesting characters to bounce off of. But even the humans are as flat as they are cartoonish. Many also thought the movie wasn't as profound as it thinks it is, citing it as a huge step down from Neil Blomkamp[c]’s “District 9.” At least the sci-fi visuals are pretty darn good.

You’d think a heist film with magicians would, at the very least, be a fun time at the movies. It also doesn’t hurt that its cast has some very charismatic actors. Unfortunately it just didn't have the magic. The already convoluted plot relied heavily on tricks that would be literally impossible to pull off. Maybe some on camera practical effects and less CGI would’ve made it more believable. It also would've been a fun way to pay homage to real life illusionists and escape artists. In the end the movie wasn’t boring, and it proved popular enough to spawn sequels, but it was far and away from the magical heist thriller we wanted it to be.

An adaptation of a popular Michael Crichton[d] book would seem like a slam dunk. After all, “Jurassic Park” was a huge hit both on screen and on the page. However, “Timeline” was both a financial and critical failure. Starring Paul Walker, Frances O’Connor, and Gerard Butler, it follows a team of corporate time travelers during the Hundred Years’ War. If that sounds like an odd mix, you’d be right. Audiences just couldn’t connect with the sci-fi elements and the medieval swashbuckling. Not even Richard Donner, the director behind “Lethal Weapon” and “The Goonies,” could make it work. The film got terrible reviews and lost Paramount about tens of millions at the box office. Hopefully the book will get properly adapted in the future.

After “Guardians of the Galaxy” elevated him to stardom, Chris Pratt was set to take the industry by storm. He was cast in a film by director Morten Tyldum[e], who's best known for his Oscar-nominated work on “The Imitation Game.” Then when Jennifer Lawrence got on board, it seemed like “Passengers” was destined to be a huge success. Instead it was brought down by heavy-handed dialogue and a flawed third act. Others accuse the film of being downright creepy in its portrayal of love, with many saying that it should've just been a thriller in space. Even Jennifer Lawrence agrees that changes would've improved it.

While a movie about art historians and museum directors trying to preserve paintings during World War II might seem like a thrilling romp, “The Monuments Men” ended up being a disappointing two hour snooze fest. A star-studded cast of Hollywood’s elite couldn’t save this war drama and actually only slowed the film down when time had to be allotted to each character’s story. Although there are some interesting action bits in it, nothing of any substance really happens and viewers just have to sit back and watch as they’re taken on a slow ride to the credits.

An intriguing premise and timely cast made this movie a hot commodity before its release. Unfortunately, “In Time” added up to nothing more than an interesting idea with no real substance. The movie sets up an alternate future where the amount of time you have left to live is also currency, but too much of the first half of its runtime is spent setting up this confusing premise - which eventually devolves into a Bonnie and Clyde-esque adventure. Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried[f] head up the movie’s fresh-faced cast, but neither convincingly pulls off their roles. Audiences were left confused and slightly bored by this sci-fi misfire.

Will Smith brings charm, comedy and a little extra something to all of his roles, so audiences tend to flock to anything he’s in. Couple that with the burgeoning superhero craze and you got yourself a sure hit, right?! Unfortunately, fans of the Fresh Prince were displeased by the lack of charm and the incoherent plot structure of “Hancock.” The foremost complaint was that the superhero comedy drama starts well, but halfway through undercuts its own humorous premise and introduces a wobbly love triangle. The special effects and super-powered action weren’t enough to carry the movie across the finish line and what we’re left with was an uninteresting mess.

As bizarre as the premise is, this could have been a great movie. It had a lot going for it, including popular lead actor Matt Damon, award-winning director Alexander Payne, and a concept weird enough to draw in audiences. But the story about a man who shrinks himself down ended up falling short. The social satire was half baked, with comedy undermining its deeper messages. Matt Damon also just seemed pretty boring in the role of Paul. There are countless criticisms that people had with the film, but ultimately it flopped at the box office and is mostly remembered for squandering its intriguing premise.

Pitched as a “haunted house story in space,” this sci-fi flick was a critical and commercial failure. It fell far short of recouping its budget and was criticized for its reliance on horror clichés. Worst of all, it wasn't really scary. Director Paul W. S. Anderson chalks this up to the rushed editing process, which he thinks made the direction and acting look worse than it is. Paramount nonetheless forced him to release a cut he wasn't happy with. If we got his complete vision maybe it would have been a hit. We can see glimpses of brilliance in the atmosphere and set design. The film's gained a cult following over the years, indicating there’s something there - just not enough to fully satisfy.

Hot off the successful “Pirates of the Caribbean” series, we were ready for Gore Verbinski[g] and Johnny Depp’s next blockbuster. How could this actor/director pairing disappoint? Well, by being an Old West take on the “Pirates” films, but without any of the charm that made them work. We will say that the set pieces are impressive and display some Buster Keaton-levels of creativity. It falls flat, however, in nearly every other department. The plot moves at a snail’s pace and both its heroes and villains are bland. The depiction of Native American history also garnered controversy that didn’t do it any favors. With some tweaks this could have been the Western genre’s grand return to the mainstream.

The novel of the same name is a popular and critically acclaimed piece of crime fiction. Based on the unsolved murder of Elizabeth Short, the story follows two police detectives out to solve the case. The adaptation maybe would have been great - if David Fincher hadn't left to direct “Zodiac.” Instead Brian De Palma was given the reins, and what we got was a movie that feels like a parody of film noir. Critics generally agreed that the script is incoherent and needlessly complicated. And despite its star studded cast, De Palma just couldn't get good performances out of them. However, both the director and original author claim that the initial three hour cut is the far better film.

This movie's premise alone had us hooked: one night a year, all crime is legal, and a family must survive until morning. With the whole country as a backdrop, you'd expect something more than just a standard home invasion thriller. And that's where the problems start to show themselves. The predictable script wasted actors Ethan Hawke and Lena Headey[h], and the action wasn't exciting enough to make up for it. At its worst, the movie was mind-numbingly generic and full of clichés. We were eager for a dystopian take on society's violent urges, but “The Purge” was ultimately just another bland rehash of familiar ideas. Still, that premise was enough to sustain a franchise - but oh, what might have been!

An epic comic book anthology created by one of the most influential comic book writers of all time and Sean Connery as an adventure-seeking legend grouped with the most badass literary characters of all time; that’s gotta be a sure-fire recipe for a comic book adaptation if there ever was one, right?! Wrong. “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen,” or LXG as it is lovingly referred to by… no one, was a critical flop when it came out, as it treated the audience to a condensed storyline that became incoherent and lacked any semblance of character development. Somewhere in a deep magical cave, Alan Moore is probably still cursing Hollywood.

How does that old saying go? You don’t bring a cinematographer to a director fight? Something like that. Well, that timeworn adage has proven itself true once again with this half-hearted attempt at a science-fiction brainteaser. While the story asks a lot of questions about the future of computer science and artificial intelligence, it never puts forth any satisfactory answers. Instead, it leads the viewer on a narrative goose-chase that doesn’t resolve itself. Familiar and well-loved faces fill all of the main roles, but the actors struggle to keep up with the disjointed storyline, giving “Transcendence” the awkward feel of a B-movie sci-fi.

In this American-Canadian production, the director of “Iron Man,” the early 21st century James Bond, and the legendary Han Solo come together to give you an epic tale of Wild West action and extra terrestrial mayhem. Producers must have been patting themselves on the back for developing and releasing this sure-to-be-a-blockbuster film. Alas, the whole was not nearly as rousing as the sum of its parts. “Cowboys & Aliens” made less sense than its title, opting not to take advantage of the tropes of either genre and instead focusing on a group of characters that were just as lost as the audience. The potential was there, but the execution was lacking.

Up until 2011, Zack Snyder’s directorial credits included “Dawn of the Dead” and “300.” Needless to say, fans of epic action extravaganzas were looking forward to this Japan-influenced ultra flick. But buried under strata of bad CGI and even worse acting is what could have been an interesting story of a helpless girl who is unable to deal with reality and succumbs to psychotic episodes in which she is a powerful heroine. Instead, we are left with something like an incoherent visual tone poem that fails to impart any sense of emotional depth, all thanks to Snyder’s distinct inability to deal with story structure and character development.

The classic Universal Monsters series is one of the studio's best franchises. In 2017, horror fans were eager to see a fresh take on the iconic Mummy story. With a team of talented writers and Tom Cruise as the lead, it was expected to be the start of a shared universe. But it was such a misfire that the so-called “Dark Universe” was scrapped before it even really got started. At best, the film was an action horror that’s light on scares; at worst, it was a typical blockbuster with forced humor. It also made the mistake of spending too much time setting up said cinematic universe. What was supposed to be the Universal Monsters’ grand return was sadly a big disappointment.

It was the mid-90s and no one could wait to see the next big Kevin Costner flick. On top of that, “Waterworld” had a huge budget and was reportedly being filmed on the ocean on a super expensive set. Sadly, bloated, incomprehensible, and waterlogged, this ambitious Kevin Costner classic seemed like it aimed to please almost no one, which would be refreshing except that it achieved this goal pretty spectacularly. From long before its release, whispers surfaced of the film’s increasing budget and production setbacks. Those whispers turned to screams when what was originally a 100 million dollar film ballooned into an almost 175 million dollar flop.