Top 30 Worst Movies Based on Video Games

For a martial arts movie, “Tekken” isn’t the worst thing we’ve seen. For a movie based on the acclaimed 3D fighting franchise, is everything a fan would never want from a “Tekken” movie as it completely ignores the franchise’s story in favor of something original. Jin is some street punk doing contraband runs and is trained by Steve Fox…even though Jin does karate whereas Steve practices boxing. Christie Monteiro and Eddy Gordo have nothing to do with each other despite having a whole story between mentor and master in the games. But are the fights at least good? Well, we couldn’t tell - the camera wouldn’t stop shaking for us to appreciate whatever choreography there might have been.

If you were looking for a cheap popcorn flick, perhaps “Uncharted” wasn’t as bad as fans were making it out to be. But that’s if you aren’t a fan of the games in the first place. Almost nothing about this movie felt like “Uncharted” until the very end of the movie, and by that point, it was too little, too late. “Uncharted” spent too long relishing in heist tropes, being annoyingly mysterious about character motives, and making very, very few allusions to the games outside of Nolan North’s cameo. Separated from the games, maybe “Uncharted” is decent at best. Unfortunately, it’s hard to ignore how much it deviates from the games when every game in the franchise is basically a playable movie in itself. And they’re playable movies with great writing and pacing.

This oft-forgotten animated movie should have been a hit. It has a great cast with some actors having already played their respective roles in the 2007 video game. But it's literally everything else that made it fall apart. The story makes no sense, the music gives the movie no identity, and worse, the animation makes “Mars Needs Moms” look like a DaVinci painting. If Sony had enough confidence in the IP to make a movie adaptation seven years after the game came out, you would think more time, money, and effort would have gone into this. Alas, no, and now, it's hard to say if we’ll ever see Nariko ever again.

There isn’t much of a story to “Angry Birds”. You just launch birds with different powers to defeat evil, green pigs. What reason is there to make a movie? Well, if you wanted yet another corny family-friendly movie with a cast loaded with SNL alumni, you got your wish here. Even though “The Angry Birds Movie” has its moments, the star-power and uninteresting plot make it feel more like a cash grab project. The young ones may have had their fun with this, but for the grown-ups, there were better options to waste an hour and a half.

Look, the Paul W.S. Anderson movies may not be the “Resident Evil” movies we wanted, but there are some redeeming qualities when you watch them as cheesy action-horror flicks. Besides, they are way better than whatever we’re getting with “Welcome to Raccoon City”! Once again, “Resident Evil’s” own unique story is sidelined for something else entirely, and the plot does nothing to garner interest in the IP. Every one of our favorite characters is unlikeable to the very end and given no proper motives or development at any point in the 107-minute runtime. There’s just no room for Raccoon City in the world of TV and movies.

Whereas “Uncharted” frustrated many fans, “Five Nights at Freddy’s” pleased many fans, but only the fans. There are aspects to “Five Nights at Freddy’s” that can be appreciated between the production design and faithfulness to the IP. However, those who know nothing about the games were taken for what felt like an erratic ride for a horror movie. Dead kids haunting the bodies of animatronics, everyone seemingly knowing about this cursed pizzeria yet no one wanting to tear it down, and the whole twist with Vanessa towards the end felt haphazardly thrown together. Couldn’t this have just been a one-man movie in the same vein as “1408” or something? Again, lore-fueled fanatics might have loved the movie, but for others…well, let’s hope the sequel has more focus, huh?

Ideally, “Ratchet & Clank” could work very well as a movie. Unfortunately, this was not the tale of a Lombax and robot we needed. Credit where it's due, the animation here is pretty solid and fits the style of the games from Insomniac. Plus, we respect the decision to keep the original voice cast. Unfortunately, the plot was super thin with Chairman Drek having no motive outside of being a corporate overlord and Qwark being even more of an egomaniac than he is in the games. Even with a ninety-minute runtime, come on, you could have told a compelling sci-fi epic with this IP! Was there any semblance of structure in the story during pre-production that could have added more depth to the characters? Oh, well. Shoulda, coulda, woulda…but didn’t.

We all know what “Monster Hunter” is, right? Yeah, it’s the fantasy action RPG where you and three friends can explore exotic locations to fight colossal beasts together. So, in that synopsis, where is the part where we mentioned something about the U.S. Army going isekai and being transported to another world? What’s frustrating about “Monster Hunter” is the fact that the movie clearly knows the IP, its world, and its characters. Why else would it use the same monsters and weapons as the games? And yet, it opts to use entirely different characters from a world that would never be seen in a “Monster Hunter” game as well as some of the most boring environments that look nothing like the worlds we’ve seen in the games! Who was this movie for exactly if not for the fans?

To its credit, “Annihilation” at least pulled a few threads from both the old and new “DOOM” games, but only in shoutouts and lore. Does it boast the same intense action, horrific imagery, and a garish depiction of Hell? Well, in a half-assed fashion, maybe. Actually, quarter-assed. From the get go, you can smell how cheap Universal went on the budget with constantly reused set pieces, poor direction, and a story that constantly meanders and kills off its cast with little to no warning. Plus, the whole pointless symbolism with our main character, Joan Dark… Do you get it? Do you get the symbolism? “Joan Dark”, Joan of Arc? Do you get it?? DO YOU GET IT?!?

It has been quite some time since we saw a video game movie bomb as severely as “Borderlands” did. There was not a soul on Earth that wanted this to happen, yet it somehow went through its entire production. “Borderlands” not only made questionable decisions with its casting and writing, its humor and lack of a meaningful plot was kind of a window into why most folks don’t like or don’t even care for “Borderlands” anymore. Never before had we seen Lilith, Tiny Tina, and Claptrap at their most annoying points, and after this, some fans were left questioning if it was time to move on from the world of Pandora.

In another case of what might have been, “Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time” had the potential to be a thoroughly enjoyable film. Critic Brian Tallerico summed up our disappointment best, though, writing, quote “Imagine watching someone else play a video game while another guy narrates it.” The characters, despite their decent casting, are stereotypical, the plot is confusing and ridiculous, and the ending is highly predictable. It’s a watchable film, however, so at least there’s that. Coming off the vastly superior “Sands of Time” game, however, it could’ve been so much more.

The “Resident Evil” film series contains six entries, none of which were well-received critically. The final film isn’t an exception and they didn’t exactly save best for last. As critic Donald Clarke put it, quote “The film comprises 20 per cent boring plot talk and 80 per cent even more boring action.” The film itself was widely panned for being dull and sloppy while the action often proved too dark to make out. Unfortunately, more than one critic theorized that this would most likely be a never-ending franchise, despite the word “final” in the title.

Making a movie out of an arena fighting game is difficult and “DOA” is a prime example. The games were praised for their environments, gameplay, and impressive graphics. The movie was not... to put it generously. Cited by many critics as an excuse to show hot girls doing martial arts, the film was not much more than that. We suppose watching this on mute would be a good idea... if babes and kung fu are your thing. For anyone who wants something of substance, though, “Dead on Arrival” would’ve been a more appropriate title.

Racing is fun. Cars are cool. These were the two things that spawned the film adaptation of “Need for Speed.” Making a feature film out of a racing game is essentially about as practical as making one out of a classic board game. Critics were generally displeased with the film, calling it boring and lacking in character development, some going as far as to say the cars are its strongest point. It’s not surprising that a decent movie couldn’t be made out of a “car go fast” video game. On the heels of “Breaking Bad,” Aaron Paul’s big-screen vehicle sadly turned out to be a lemon.

What to do when the first installment of a film gets a lackluster Rotten Tomatoes score? Make a sequel, of course! “The Cradle of Life” wasn’t much of an improvement, which is a shame. The “Tomb Raider” games are beloved by players, and the anticipation for film adaptations was surely high. It’s becoming a bit of a pattern at this point: the characters in “The Cradle of Life” were underdeveloped, leading to a lack of engagement in the plot. Also, Lara Croft literally punches a badly CGI-ed shark in the film. Insert your own “jumping the shark” references here.

The “Assassin’s Creed” game franchise is massive, rich in history and narrative, and contains many beloved, interesting characters. The film is none of these things. It switches back and forth from past to present (much like the games), yet makes a muddled mess of plots (or non-plots). It is very well-cast, but it seems that the A-list actors were bored and uninvested in the parts. One possible issue is that the film strayed too far from the source material and got lost. The games are so rich and ripe to be farmed, yet nothing other than a couple of nods to the main gameplay staples were seen in the film. And what the heck did you do to the Animus?!

We’ll try to avoid the obvious puns with the movie title here. Another video game adaptation attempt, 2008’s “Max Payne” provided its audience with a painful experience (sorry, it’s too easy). The film was fairly dull, focusing entirely on the visuals rather than the dialogue and acting. Think “Sin City,” but not good. Critic David Hogan went as far as to say the character of Max was better acted in the video game. It’s probably easy to get carried away with visuals in these projects, as players expect to see frequent nods to their favorite games. “Max Payne” did impress with photography and general ambiance, but failed everywhere else.

Fans of the classic game were not pleased with the multiple character changes in this adaptation. “Street Fighter” the movie is filled with cheesy one-liners, a muddled storyline, and takes way too many liberties with character deviations. We’re talking entire character backstories thrown out and rewritten. One example is that Van Damme’s character is supposed to be quintessentially “All-American.” The issue here is obvious. The film’s one redeeming quality is the late Raul Julia’s over-the-top performance as villain General M. Bison. Despite the campy source material, Julia delivered a professional and theatrically acclaimed performance. The film was his last, unfortunately.

Film critic Marc Savlov, giving the film a 0 out of 5, sums up this film quite nicely: quote “enduring this botched (video game-based) nightmare is like sleepwalking into the world's dullest Halloween party.” The film’s first installment had more than twice the budget of its sequel, and a far less convoluted plot to follow, yet it still didn’t earn high praise. Thus, why not make a sequel and introduce a confusing “cult” subplot? We have a theory. This film and its predecessor did badly because Sean Bean survived both films. In order for a film to be canonized in the Hollywood ranks, should it boast Sean Bean in the cast, Sean Bean must die in the film. It’s a scientific fact.

Though this film was praised for its visual beauty and performances, it was panned for its lack of an interesting plot (we’re beginning to see a pattern here). Fans of the games were awestruck by the scenery and likeness to the general atmosphere of the playable version. The orcs are very well-rendered, and the lands beautifully displayed. But there was room for far more character and story development to be had from the games of origin. What “Warcraft” did have going for it is the fact that those unfamiliar with the games could still enjoy the film. That, however, doesn’t mean they did.

The “Doom” series has been a staple of gaming since 1993. With a long-running collection of games, you’d think the film would stick to the source material. For example, the creatures in the game “Doom” were simply demons from Hell, and not genetically transformed humans. The wormhole idea is also one of the filmmakers’ and just adds unnecessary complexity to an otherwise simple concept. The film’s one redeeming quality is the first-person shooter sequence - a direct homage to the games. The scene took 3 months of careful planning, and 14 days of shooting. With that much meticulous attention to one scene, perhaps the filmmakers overlooked everything else. The second “Doom” film is lucky it was sent direct-to-video. Otherwise, it’d be another strong contender for this list.

2007’s “Hitman” film was a flop, garnering less than 20% on Rotten Tomatoes. So, let’s try again… change up the cast, etc. Aaaand now it’s less than 10%. At least the original film was deemed terrible but watchable. This film was a collage of mindless, trashy action sequences, not to mention a bore. It’s unfortunate because lead actor Rupert Friend did all his homework for the role. He studied more than one fighting style, knife fighting skills, and judo, as well as performed most of his own stunts. It’s a shame the rest of the crew couldn’t put in as dedicated an effort to produce a quality film to compliment Friend’s talents.

Despite it being in many 90s kids’ memories, Variety’s critic Brian Lowry referred to “Double Dragon” as a quote “high-energy, low-IQ futuristic slugfest.” It depicts the story of two brothers… who share zero resemblance. You know, they were twins in the game, right? The film did feature some decent special effects, but the actors’ performances were really amateurish, the dialogue campy, and the story too simplistic. Another problem is that the director intended it to be for kids, although it was still given a PG-13 rating. Expectations are different in the older audience category. Keep this one in your childhood memories. Don’t watch it now.

It seems exceedingly difficult to make a decent “Street Fighter” film. The 2009 film made viewers wish Van Damme had made a sequel. Famed film critic Leonard Maltin claimed that “Legend of Chun-Li” made the original “Street Fighter” film seem like “Citizen Kane.” Oof. Contrary to some of the entries on our list, this film has no redeeming qualities. Even the fight scenes, which are often of primary focus in these movies, are poorly choreographed. As is seemingly custom in the films on our list, the screenplay is also subject to ridicule. If you’re a fan of the “Street Fighter” franchise, stick to the games.

Based on the popular “Dungeon Siege” games, this film boasts an abysmal rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Believe it or not, that’s not even the worst score for the notoriously terrible director, Uwe Boll, who typically finances his own films. This film stars Jason Statham as the farmer protagonist and a slew of desperate-for-work actors of 1990s fame. But whom, you may ask, plays the titular king? Why Burt Reynolds, of course! Yes, Burt Reynolds. You’ll regret watching this forgettable, campy pile of garbage. So maybe read a book or something instead.

Come one, now, you didn’t think we’d leave this one out, right? The “Super Mario Bros.” film is infamously terrible, with a production wrought with hardships, unhappy actors, and inexperienced directors. The studio demanded so many changes in the script that the end result was an almost non-existent plot, flashy nonsensical scenes, and an overall experience that made us wish we were watching the TV show again. The film strays much too far from the game, and is bound to disappoint any Mario-phile. Celebrated thespian Bob Hoskins called it “the worst thing [he] ever did”, claiming that he and John Leguizamo would drink before and during the job in order to endure the torture.

2006’s “BloodRayne” is another disaster from Uwe Boll, but still somehow not his worst. By this point, it becomes clear that adapting a simple shooter video game to the screen is a bad idea. The fight scenes are basically editing nightmares, with clearly untrained actors being cut and pasted into oblivion. Boll’s decisions are most likely the problem here - the man hired actual prostitutes for one scene to save on money. The standards for this one were obviously quite low. Wait, is that Ben Kingsley?! What are you doing here?

This film was directed by Uwe Boll… again?! And there’s still one on this list that ranks even higher?! It never ends with this guy! “House of the Dead” doesn’t actually feature any known actors, contrary to some of Boll’s others. It’s a zombie film, with some young, reckless people fighting the undead on an island and a boat. That is all, there is no plot to be had, so fans of actual narrative in films beware. Critic David Keyes claimed that the film made him quote “weeping for the future of the industry.” Honestly, we can’t really expect much from a film based on a Sega arcade game.

This is it, Uwe Boll’s absolute worst video game adaptation. Honestly, we think we’re being generous by only ranking it #2. The film was intended to be released at the same time as Eden Games’ “Alone in the Dark 5.” However, the studio drew back and delayed the release of the game, reworking the entire thing. Hmm… suspicious. No one likes this film. It is a braindead, unintentionally funny mess. The game, at least, had some scary moments. The film is just an empty waste of time. It’s usually a good indication that the film will be subpar when actors you haven’t really seen since the 90s headline the performances, and you say, “oh yeah, that guy.” But still, Christian Slater deserves better than this.

The original “Mortal Kombat” film set a fairly low bar for its sequel. But the filmmakers seem to have misunderstood that you need to go above the bar, not win a limbo championship. The original film at least seemed badass - probably mostly due to the theme song. The sequel is… a thing. This film has it all: terrible acting, unnecessary and also inexplicably awful special effects, kicks and punches and punches and kicks. That pretty much sums it up. The franchise was supposed to produce 3 films, but this film was so bad that the third installment was canceled.

What’s the worst movie based on a video game you’ve seen? Let us know down in the comments and don’t forget to subscribe to WatchMojo!