I’ve seen 44 movies that came out this year. While there are still a few movies I need to see, I liked most of what I’ve seen this year. However, there were a few movies I left feeling disappointed. That said, a number of movies on this list I actually did not mind, and a few I even enjoyed a bit. That said, they didn’t live up to my expectations.
These movies I had fairly high expectations for, and they just didn’t match them. It might’ve just been me, but I left these movies feeling underwhelmed. However, I also took into account critics’ reviews and box office numbers, so this wasn’t entirely based on my opinion. With that said, here are the top ten most disappointing movies of the year.
10. Mickey 17
There’s a reason I wrote this article about expectations as opposed to the worst movies of the year. “Mickey 17” was good, but not good enough for what was expected. It was Bong Joon Ho’s first movie after “Parasite.” A strong follow-up was expected, and while another masterpiece wasn’t expected by everyone, an excellent movie would have been satisfactory.
Instead, “Mickey 17” was a good movie, but struggled to draw people in. Its opening weekend was a major box office flop, especially considering that it was the only major movie opening that weekend. It especially struggled at the domestic box office, where it only made about a third of its revenue and lost Warner Bros. roughly $75 million.
As for the movie itself, it was a good movie, but not a great one, and critics agreed. It had an interesting concept with the idea of cloning, and it played with it well. Mark Ruffalo’s character was a pretty good caricature of Trump and politicians in his vein. That said, I felt it didn’t have all that much to say besides condemning authoritarianism, and it didn’t focus on it that much. A big reason it disappointed is that it wasn’t sure if it wanted to be an auteur film or a blockbuster. Fans of “Parasite” wanted a more artistic and thematic movie, while Warner Bros. made a sci-fi blockbuster. Overall, it seemed like Bong and Warner Bros. could not commit to making either a pure blockbuster or an auteur film, which is why “Mickey 17” fell short of expectations.
9. Honey, Don’t!
In recent years, we’ve seen legendary directors put out flops and lose their ground in Hollywood. Unfortunately, it seems Ethan Coen has fallen to the same fate. “Honey Don’t!” had potential, I see where it could have been a classic Coen Brothers movie. However, the screenplay was all over the place and failed to build up a mystery, which is where it could’ve succeeded. There seemed to be no focused narrative, and an irrelevant subplot. I feel as if Coen wanted to make a more violent version of “Fargo,” but didn’t want to put the time and effort into doing so.
“Honey, Don’t!” It is a sequel of sorts to last year’s “Drive-Away Dolls,” which is part of a “B-list Lesbian trilogy,” as Coen describes it. While “Drive-Away Dolls” is lackluster compared to Coen’s earlier work with his brother, it is more focused and has a stronger grip on the narrative than “Honey Don’t!”. Margaret Qualley puts in another good but nothing special performance in her second appearance in this trilogy. There are scenes that are pretty well-directed, and the cinematography is actually really good, which makes it clear Coen knows how to shoot a movie. Yet Coen’s name put the expectations high when something like “Drive-Away Dolls” should’ve been expected. It fell well short of expectations because the end product was not all that good and only grossed $7.4 million. Overall, a misfire.
8. Eddington
Most people liked “Eddington,” and it is on some top ten lists of the year. I am not one of those people. Not only do I think “Eddington” was a huge disappointment, but also one of the worst movies I’ve seen this year. I can acknowledge that it does have some good performances from Pedro Pascal and Joaquin Phoenix, and it is not a boring screenplay. That said, director and writer Ari Aster decided to talk about politics, and that did not go well. A movie discussing the politics of mid-2020 could have been interesting. However, as someone who was very politically aware and active then, it felt more opinionated.
“Eddington” touches on mask mandates, Black Lives Matter, conspiracy theories, political activism online, Antifa, and the far-right. Yet, all it really said was that conspiracy theories are bad. It handled Black Lives Matter poorly, as it made it seem like it was just performative activism and that any attempts to share its message were moot if you were just spreading awareness. Aster completely missed the objective of Black Lives Matter and how it spread awareness through social media, which led to police reform.
For a movie set during COVID, nobody seems concerned about it, and it’s in the background for the second half. It tries to discuss the negatives of online politics on both sides, but it just scratches the surface by portraying the left as loud activists and the right as conspiracy nuts when both communities are far more complex. That’s the pinnacle of its messy commentary, and since it tried to say so much, it couldn’t get that point across well. Aster clearly had a lot to say about the height of COVID, but he bit off more than he could chew.
7. Aneome
Unlike my last review, I actually liked “Anemone” while many others didn’t. It may just be that I saw it at the New York Film Festival (NYFF) with a Q&A featuring Daniel Day-Lewis, but I still thought it was thematically very strong. That said, I was more positive on it than many critics. It’s definitely not a balanced screenplay and does not have a lot of plot, which drew the ire of critics. I understand why many did not like this movie besides Day-Lewis’s performance. It is extremely slow and a little confusing in the first act, but if you wait and see the third act, it all comes together and is actually quite good.
A reason it disappointed a lot of people is that they hyped up Day-Lewis’s return to acting and tied it to the rest of the movie. Day-Lewis came back without missing a beat, and that was a big strength of the movie. Additionally, I thought it tackled fatherhood, trauma and brotherhood well, but you just wouldn’t understand it until the end. The issue is that you had to wait so long to understand the movie, and most people didn’t have the patience to do so. It also felt a bit long, considering there wasn’t all that much plot. Few people saw this, too, with it only grossing a million and a half dollars. A lot of people enjoyed Day-Lewis’s return to the big screen, but many people found it underwhelming as a narrative.
6. Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning
After nearly 30 years and eight movies, “Mission: Impossible” finally came to an end. Yet, it didn’t do so on a high note. Most people did not dislike “Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning,” and I likewise agree. In terms of action, it has plenty and does not disappoint in that aspect. The issue is that besides those scenes, the movie relied too much on action sequences for its light plot. A nearly three-hour run time was definitely excessive, and it went by slowly.
The screenplay is very lackluster, with little character development and relying too much on the action sequences over the story. The action sequences were quite good, which is to be expected out of a Mission Impossible movie. Maybe I was expecting too much, but it felt as if it only delivered on the action. It feels much like a rehash of previous movies in the franchise and doesn’t offer much new. And for a movie that cost $300-$400 million, it looks honestly quite cheap. The CGI does not look all that great, and there is a lot of it. While it did make just under $600 million at the box office, this was far from what it needed to make a profit. Overall, plain repetitiveness did not work for “Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning,” ultimately ending the franchise poorly.
5. Ella McCay
If Coen is already facing trouble in his career, he should hope he doesn’t become James L. Brooks. Brooks released his first movie in 15 years, “Ella McCay,” and it has done very poorly with both critics and at the box office. “Ella McCay” follows the titular character (Emma Mackey) as she becomes the Governor of her unnamed state while her father (Woody Harrelson) tries to make amends with her and she tries to rebuild her relationship with her brother (Spike Fearn). The movie was unremarkable, and it strays away from the main conflict a lot. I think the concept is interesting, but much of it isn’t about Ella becoming Governor, and more so a family drama trying to reconnect. The plot stretches Ella too thi,n and she’s just running around for two hours.
The acting in this movie is fine, many of these actors put in decent performances. I also found it to have a certain charm about it; it wasn’t an unenjoyable experience. It just never strived to be more than satisfactory, and it barely did that. If it had one central plot as opposed to multiple subplots, it could’ve been good. “Ella McCay” should’ve been a good way for Brooks to end his movie career strongly, but instead, it is too distracting to build a strong story.
4. Materialists
I had hope that Celine Song would have a strong second movie after “Past Lives.” It seems “Materialists” is a sophomore slump for her. There are moments where “Materialists” is really good, especially in scenes between Dakota Johnson and Pedro Pascal. The setup for the main conflict is good, especially when laying out the problems with Lucy’s (Johnson) career and love life. The rest just didn’t do it for me. A big issue is that I felt it was not all that engaging of a screenplay. I didn’t feel attached to the characters. I watched it twice, and I didn’t get hooked on it. The love triangle had potential, but it felt really unbalanced in the conflict. The emotional core that Song had in “Past Lives” was missing here. It’s also pretty one-dimensional thematically, which didn’t really help its staying power. Maybe this isn’t the movie for me, but regardless, it disappointed me this year.
3. Him
I already did a review on “Him” when it came out, but it really fell below expectations. A big reason is that it was too tied to Jordan Peele, and a high-quality Peele movie was expected when he wasn’t even directing or writing it. Yes, he had a lot of say while producing it, but he didn’t have as much say in it as his other projects. It also wasn’t that good at being a horror movie and felt a bit more like a psychological thriller. Looking back at it, I think it had potential to be a thoughtful commentary on athletes and contrast it with the effort they put into their skill. It never took itself seriously enough to do so and never really developed Cam (Tyriq Withers) enough to make him a driving protagonist. Had it been more decisive in its tone and narrative, this could’ve been a good movie.
2. A Big Bold Beautiful Journey
In an age where it seems like consistent draws to the theaters are dying, I thought Margot Robbie was an exception. I was sorely mistaken. While Robbie puts in a solid performance in “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey,” it is by far the most awkward movie of the year. It feels very clunky, and while Robbie and Colin Farrell individually put in good performances, they have virtually no chemistry. The entire plot feels really forced, from product placement to the random ending; it did not flow well. It feels like it’s trying to be a whimsical version of “When Harry Met Sally…,” but it just isn’t at all. These characters are just not meant to fall in love, and it’s painfully clear. It also feels like a large trauma dump at points, where the characters just relive past events without showing how they’ve grown. The mix of fantasy and trauma is a difficult thing to do, and “A Big Bold Beautiful Journey” just couldn’t do it, even with two talented actors.
1. After the Hunt
I’ll be honest, I’m not that big a fan of Luca Guadagnino. Of the movies I’ve seen from him, I think they’re all good but nothing all that special or memorable. Then he came out with “After the Hunt.” Being the opening show at the NYFF with a star-studded cast, expectations were high. Yet, it is one of the most confusing and unsatisfying movies I’ve seen. Guadagnino wanted to tackle a sensitive topic with sexual assault, and I commend him for tackling it.
Alma (Julia Roberts), a philosophy professor at Yale, is told by her student/friend, Maggie (Ayo Edebiri), that she was sexually assaulted by Alma’s colleague Hank (Andrew Garfield), which leads to Alma being at the center of the case. There are a lot of things going on in the script, yet over two hours later, not all that much has changed. The setup for the conflict has a lot of potential, and I was looking forward to seeing it play out. However, it goes by so slowly that it’s hard to get into it without zoning out.
The second half is a mess, with Alma being pretty mean-spirited. A subplot with Alma’s past is way too drawn out for a pretty obvious conclusion to it. There’s simultaneously too much and too little going on here. The runtime is much too long, and it seems the movie is really trying to extend itself. While it has a strong cast with Roberts, Edebiri, and Garfield, none of them really stand out that much. While many have praised Roberts, she feels too subtle to the point where she is emotionless. Garfield honestly gives the best performance of the three, but it’s not award-worthy or even worthy of a nomination. “After the Hunt” was too convoluted and jumbled that it stopped trying in the second half, where the movie really takes a nose dive.
Overall
Expectations can make or break a movie, including the directors, writers ,and actors involved in a given project. While many of these movies were not all that bad, they simply missed their goals and the expected quality. Hopefully, those involved in these movies can bounce back and have more success in 2026 and on.
