10 Worst Horror Movies With the Best Special Effects

10 Worst Horror Movies With the Best Special Effects



With Halloween not too far off now, fans of horror are already beginning to sense a change in the content atmosphere as we get closer to their favorite time of year. For horror fans, this period of the year is a chance to fully immerse themselves in all things horror. For film buffs, it means the excitement of the major horror films that studios usually time for release during the Halloween season. In the lead up, it also gives them an excuse to watch classics and old favorites again.




Unfortunately, for many horror fans, it can be a genre marked by a lot of disappointment. To that end, many fans bemoan the lack of great horror movies despite the genre churning out a ton of films each year. As a beloved category that many audiences everywhere look forward to each year, it can be frustrating when such a large percentage of new horror films simply lack originality.

What often fuels all of this is the way large studios pump money into effects for horror films, believing the quality of a horror movie’s SFX will carry its scares. While that can be true on some occasions, the best horror movies in history, like The Exorcist, usually need great effects and a great story to be hailed as such. However, there have been plenty of examples where great special effects were unable to save bad horror films from being panned.


With that in mind, here’s a look at 10 horror movies that had terrible critical ratings but featured amazing special effects.


10 The Thing (2011)

Despite The Thing being a direct prequel to John Carpenter’s classic 1982 film of the same name, this one was both a critical and commercial failure. On the surface, it didn’t seem to take many missteps either, as it featured a cast led by Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Joel Edgerton and told a solid story that followed a team of scientists on an Antarctic mission to study a crashed alien spacecraft and the supposed body of the alien itself. The only problem is, the alien isn’t actually dead and soon begins wreaking havoc on the team.


An Ode to a Great That Didn’t Quite Stick the Landing

In some ways, the film was both saved and cursed by its more illustrious predecessor. While it contained many of the same tropes that made the first film such a classic, this one wasn’t quite able to capture the same claustrophobic sense of terror. However, as the alien from these films is famously able to mimic others, it gave the film the opportunity to dazzle with special effects — an area it did shine in as it featured some terrific scenes that were brilliantly executed on that front.

9 Alien: Resurrection (1997)


As the fourth installment of the classic sci-fi-horror franchise, Alien: Resurrection came at a time when the franchise was already starting to flounder. Far from the days when Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) was portrayed in a manner that made the character a pop culture icon, this one is set 200 years after her death. That fact alone already put it at a disadvantage despite Ripley featuring in the film, since her character was actually a clone of the original character.

The SFX Hit the Mark in Some Horrifying Ways


With its somewhat incoherent story and a less fetching cast (minus Winona Ryder), the film barely cracked a 50% critical rating, making it a far cry from the 98% and 97% scores the legendary first two films achieved under the stewardship of Ridley Scott and James Cameron respectively. While it did receive a better score than David Fincher’s Alien 3 (45%) and is better-received these days, the film was widely scorned by fans.

However, when it came to special effects, there wasn’t much anyone could complain about as it provided plenty of superbly designed and executed scenes. Depicting the aliens and their actions in some truly horrifying ways, the film again showcased why this franchise was always more than comfortable slotting into the horror genre as much as it leaned on sci-fi tropes.

8 The Possession of Hannah Grace (2018)


While it certainly had its moments and was an entertaining horror movie, The Possession of Hannah Grace never garnered any clout from critics as it scored a paltry 18% rating. Starring Shay Mitchell, it followed the creepy story of a young woman who was possessed by a demon, killed, then reanimated by the demon, and set loose in a morgue during an ex-cop turned rookie technician’s night shift. It had all the makings of a very scary film. However, it never lived up to this billing and came across as very contrived instead.

The SFX Made It Visually Pleasing as a Horror Film


Despite its bad rating, the film performed well at the box office and certainly provided a pleasing horror aesthetic through its special effects. As the film’s plot relied on the dead body slowly reanimating after being stabbed, hacked, and burned, the process of making it slink around in the shadows as it used other living characters’ body parts to put itself back together made it very unnerving at times.

7 Ghost Ship (2002)

Although enjoying some cult popularity online, Ghost Ship was a pretty forgettable film in its day. It revolves around a luxury ocean liner that mysteriously disappears with its crew but turns up 40 years later when it’s spotted drifting along by a salvage crew. Unbeknownst to them, the ship has a dark past and as its true fate unfolds, mysterious and supernatural events begin plaguing the salvage crew.


It Was Nominated for a Worst Picture Award

It featured two great actors in Gabriel Byrne and Julianna Marguilles, but neither could save it from a 15% rating, making it a critical disappointment despite being a commercial success. In fact, it was so badly panned that it was nominated for Worst Picture at the 2003 Fangoria Chainsaw Awards. Despite this, the film still receives throwbacks on social media today for some of its terrific effects, having one of the greatest opening scenes for its time in a horror movie, and plenty of well-done gore.

Here’s a look at the official trailer for the film for anyone thinking of giving this one a try.


6 Silent Hill: Revelation (2006)

A sequel to Silent Hill and the second film based on the famous horror video game series, Silent Hill: Revelation was released in 2012 and directed by Michael J. Bassett. It followed the character Heather, played by Adelaide Clemens. Plagued by nightmares and the disappearance of her father (Sean Bean), she’s led to the desolated town of Silent Hill and the terrifying secrets it holds.


The Cast and Effects Were Great but the Film Was Really Bad

While the games are beloved by gamers all over the world, this film fared a lot worse. While the first film was generally well-received, this one was panned for being too convoluted and relying too much on CGI. However, it was also those aspects that were its best parts. Despite it also featuring another Game of Thrones actor in Kit Harrington, the film was ultimately lackluster, with its stylish effects and monsters providing the only real excitement in the film.

5 The Haunting (1999)


A remake of a classic film from 1963 based on Shirley Jackson’s novel, The Haunting was remade in 1999 by Jan de Bont. While he was already known for blockbuster films like Twister and Speed by then, this film wasn’t as well-received. Starring a fine cast led by Liam Neeson, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Owen Wilson, and Lili Taylor (who went on to have better luck in horror films with The Conjuring), it revolves around a man named Dr. David Marrow. Convincing others to spend some time in an old and creepy house, he uses the story that they are participating in a sleep study — in reality, it’s a fear study.

It Was Heavily Criticized in Comparison to the 1963 Film


Despite some freaky scenes and a good atmosphere at times, the film itself wasn’t executed well enough by any means given its great premise and talented cast. In the end, it received generally negative reviews and was heavily criticized, especially in comparison to its far more carefully handled predecessor from the ’60s.

However, while CGI-heavy, it still came early on enough during the new age of CGI for many audiences to still be dazzled by how cool some of its SFX scenes were. Entertaining as a horror film but ultimately ineffective as a story, this one fell way below its potential.

4 Resident Evil: Retribution (2012)


The fifth film in the franchise, Resident Evil: Retribution, also has its roots in a video game franchise. Released in 2012, it was directed by Paul W.S. Anderson and saw Alice (famously played by Milla Jovovich) return as the film picked up from the last one. Captured by the Umbrella Corporation in this one, she later joins forces with the resistance to help fight them and the infamous zombies from the franchise.

It Never Even Tried for a Good Story

Praised for high-quality 3D visuals, amazing action choreography, and its usual brilliantly rendered zombies and monsters, the film was a visual feast. However, it was very badly panned for its thin plot that didn’t try very hard to throw together an actual story and basically just went for thrills. In the end, its critical rating of 28% was pretty much kind to it.


3 Imaginary (2024)

Read Our Review

Starring DeWanda Wise as Jessica, in the 2024 offering Imaginary, a step-mother who returns to her childhood home with her two step-daughters while their dad is away. There, her youngest step-daughter finds a stuffed bear named Chauncey. Alice soon begins exhibiting concerning behavior as it becomes apparent that Chauncey is no ordinary children’s toy.


A Wonderfully Imaginative World

True to its name, the film conjures up some wonderfully imaginative worlds as the bear is linked to Jessica’s horrifying past. Despite the film being made by horror specialists Blumhouse, it was badly criticized, only mustering a 24% critical rating, these aspects lent it some scary and very jarring qualities. Backed by some over-the-top but very cool special effects, these scenes made the film entertaining despite it never really getting off the ground much in terms of a coherent plot.

In the end, there wasn’t much that could save it as critics and movie sites on social media layed into the film pretty badly.


2 House on Haunted Hill (1999)

Based on a classic psychological horror film from the ’50s, the updated version of House on Haunted Hill featured an ensemble cast that included the talents of Geoffrey Rush, Famke Jannsen, and Taye Diggs. Rush and Jannsen play an eccentric married couple who invite guests to spend time in a haunted asylum. The allure is that they will receive a million dollars if they can survive it. The contestants, initially excited, soon begin experiencing all kinds of unexplained and terrifying occurrences.


It Was Visually Pleasing but Mostly a Disappointment

While the film was somewhat praised for its visual style that used a mix of early CGI and some creative cinematography to create some great tension and scares, it ultimately fell flat as a good film. Compared to the original, this one wasn’t able to quite hit the high notes of the original and was mostly criticized as a result. However, it was visually pleasing at times and the film did garner a cult following as a result and had a sequel in 2007 titled Return to House on a Haunted Hill.


1 The Devil Inside (2012)

While it was a somewhat haunting film, The Devil Inside never lived up to the hype it came with. As a found footage horror, it certainly did have its jarring moments, though this was more on account of how cleverly the effects for those scenes were done. Starring Fernanda Andrade as Isabella Rossi, it followed her as she made a documentary about the exorcism performed on her mother that left her in an asylum and three people murdered. As she investigates the past, strange occurrences and harrowing truths come to light.

A Twisty and Nervy Film


Given its found-footage nature, this one had a creepy edge to it throughout, but wasn’t a film that managed to ever break any barriers. Ultimately, it stayed derivative and unoriginal, garnering a miserable 6% critical rating despite how cool and effective many of its special effects were. However, in the end, nothing could save the film from being slaughtered by critics, as John Patterson’s review of the film for The Guardian aptly summed up:

And, yes, it’s bad. It’s very, very, very, bad. And not bad in a good way, or so bad it’s actually brilliant, or any of that. It’s the kind of bad that gives bad a bad name.



.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *