Even the greats falter, and cinema’s greatest thespians are no exception. No matter how exceptional they are, the majority of history’s great actors have delivered at least one lackluster performance. There can be multiple ways in which a performance can be deemed terrible, but one of the saddest—particularly when the performance in question is delivered by one of the greats—is a performance that feels like it was done with minimal effort or enthusiasm. In other words, a phoned-in performance.
There have been quite a few infamous occasions throughout history when actors who are otherwise legendary stars have phoned in a performance that ends up going down in history as one of their worst. Whether that laziness comes from a lack of commitment to the project, conflicts behind the scenes, or simply a misstep in the thespian’s career, these are undoubtedly some of the saddest pieces of acting that cinema has ever seen.
8
Jennifer Lawrence — ‘Dark Phoenix’ (2019)
Image via 20th Century Studios
After her breakout performance in Winter’s Bone (which, at 20 years old, made her the second-youngest Best Actress Oscar nominee in history at the time), Jennifer Lawrence has mostly been delivering exceptionally sharp and authentic performances across a variety of exciting projects. When she was cast as a young Mystique in X-Men: First Class, fans and critics alike widely praised the decision. Indeed, Lawrence made the role her own over the course of the X-Men movie franchise, all the way until Apocalypse.
As soon as Dark Phoenix came into the picture, however, things felt vastly different. It was already one of the worst superhero movies ever, but the fact that Lawrence looked like she was in it exclusively for the paycheck definitely didn’t help. Without any of the warmth and emotional depth that she had displayed in the series’ previous installments, Lawrence’s portrayal of Mystique in Dark Phoenix instead felt dry and unenthusiastic. Considering the direction that the franchise had been heading in up to that point, it’s hard to blame Lawrence for having wanted to just be done with her contract ASAP.
7
Channing Tatum — ‘G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra’ (2009)
Image via Paramount Pictures
Based on Hasbro’s popular toy line, G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra birthed a duology that, though critically panned, performed quite well at the box office. This nostalgic piece of military sci-fi is perfectly fine for those who enjoy cartoonish action, but should leave anyone craving any sort of substantial cinematic experience somewhat underwhelmed. No one felt more underwhelmed regarding Rise of Cobra, however, than its star, Channing Tatum.
Tatum has proven to be capable of delivering hilarious comedic performances, playing intimidating action heroes, and even participating in award-worthy “serious” films, but his work in G.I. Joe just ain’t it. The cause for this feels quite justified, however. Tatum initially passed on the film multiple times because he disliked the script and felt that Duke wasn’t a good fit for him, but since he was tied to a three-picture deal with Paramount, the studio threatened to sue him if he refused. His lack of interest in the role and the movie oozes through the screen every time he’s on it. For the sequel G.I. Joe: Retaliation, Tatum reportedly begged Paramount to kill his character off in the first 10 minutes of the movie—a win-win situation for Tatum and the audience alike.
6
Rooney Mara — ‘Pan’ (2015)
Rooney Mara as Tiger Lily in Pan (2015)Image by Warner Bros. Picture
Despite being directed by the great Joe Wright, Pan is one of the most pathetic box office flops in modern movie history, a $150-million-dollar creative disaster that wasn’t even able to make back its budget at the box office. Many of Pan’s elements were derided by critics and audiences alike, from its bloated CGI-heavy visuals to its awfully convoluted script, but another one of the biggest targets for criticism was the casting of Rooney Mara as Tiger Lily, one of the biggest cases of whitewashing in 2010s Hollywood.
Mara, who was already an Academy Award nominee by the point she was cast in Pan, has given ample evidence of being one of the most gifted actresses of her generation. Here, however, it’s not just her mere casting as Tiger Lily that’s the issue, but also her complete lack of effort in her utterly forgettable performance. Mara later talked about having been uncomfortable with her being at the center of the whitewashing controversy, and expressed that she only took the role so her family could see her in a family-friendly film. That discomfort and lack of commitment can be seen all throughout her screentime in Pan.
5
Michael Caine — ‘Jaws: The Revenge’ (1987)
Lorraine Gary, Michael Caine and Lance Guest holding onto detritis in the water in Jaws: The RevengeImage via Universal Pictures
In his 1992 autobiography, What’s It All About?, the legendary Sir Michael Caine famously said about his role in Jaws: The Revenge “I have never seen the film, but by all accounts it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built, and it is terrific.” It’s good that at least something good came out of The Revenge, because the fourth installment in the Jaws franchise is infamously one of the most embarrassing cinematic disasters in the art form’s history.
But aside from being one of the worst movie sequels with terrible writing, Jaws: The Revenge also features the most phoned-in performance that Michael Caine has ever delivered. There’s a complete lack of urgency in his work here, which hilariously makes it feel like his character is on vacation and entirely detached from all the horror around him. Caine delivers his admittedly ridiculous lines with complete indifference, which itself is nothing if not a testament to how gifted of a thespian he is. At least he knew that there was nothing he could do that would possibly make this material work.
4
Ben Kingsley — ‘BloodRayne’ (2005)
Sir Ben Kingsley is looking at something off-screen while wearing a purple shirt, chunky golden jewelry, and a wig while portraying the vampire king Kagan in ‘BloodRayne.’Image via Romar Entertainment
No conversation about the absolute worst motion pictures in history could ever possibly be complete without talking about Uwe Boll, author of several of the most incompetently-made movies ever. One such movie is BloodRayne, based on the video game franchise of the same name. In it, the legendary Sir Ben Kingsley plays Kagan, the King of Vampires and Rayne’s father. Such an iconic villain definitely deserved to be played by a big name, but Kingsley deserved so much better than this material.
He had always wanted to play a vampire, eager to don the fangs and cape.
Kingsley reportedly only took the role of Kagan because he had always wanted to play a vampire, eager to don the fangs and cape. The thing is that he starred in one of the worst vampire movies of the last 25 years, and he most certainly seemed to know it. Kingsley sleepwalks his way through a performance that feels more like a glorified cosplay than an actual piece of acting. There’s no denying that this Oscar-winning actor is one of history’s greatest, but there’s also no denying that he showed next to zero interest in making the character of Kagan work. Not that the script ever gave him a chance.
3
Jason Robards — ‘Julius Caesar’ (1970)
Image via American International Pictures
There is perhaps no greater actorial crime than to phone in Shakespeare, but that’s precisely what the legendary Jason Robards decided to do when he starred as Brutus in Stuart Burge’s 1970 adaptation of Julius Caesar. Before he became the first and only actor ever to win two back-to-back Best Supporting Actor Academy Awards, Robards starred in this lackluster and forgotten Shakespeare adaptation, a film that in its entirety feels like it’s phoning in the material.
No actor looks more bored to be part of the project, however, than Robards. There’s a stiff, wooden feel to the way Robards delivers each and every one of his lines, as well as a noticeable lack of chemistry with his co-stars—some of whom, namely Charlton Heston and John Gielgud, act circles around him here. Robards had reportedly never read or seen a Shakespearean play prior to taking the role, which was originally envisioned for Orson Welles, and his unhappiness with the whole process is visible in every scene he’s in.
Collider Exclusive · Oscar Best Picture Quiz
Which Oscar Best Picture
Is Your Perfect Movie?
Parasite · Everything Everywhere · Oppenheimer · Birdman · No Country
Five Oscar Best Picture winners. Five completely different visions of what cinema can be — and what it can do to you. One of them is the film that was made for the way your mind works. Ten questions will figure out which one.
🪜Parasite
🌀Everything Everywhere
☢️Oppenheimer
🐦Birdman
🪙No Country for Old Men
FIND YOUR FILM →
01
What kind of film experience do you actually want?
The best movies don’t just entertain — they leave something behind.
ASomething that pulls the rug out — that makes me think I’m watching one kind of film and then reveals I’m watching another entirely.
BSomething overwhelming — funny, sad, absurd, and genuinely moving, all at once.
CSomething grand and weighty — a film that makes me feel the full scale of what I’m watching.
DSomething formally daring — a film that pushes what cinema can even do.
ESomething lean and relentless — pure tension with no wasted frame.
NEXT QUESTION →
02
Which idea grabs you most in a film?
Great films are driven by a central obsession. What’s yours?
AClass, inequality, and what people are willing to do when desperation meets opportunity.
BIdentity, family, and the chaos of trying to hold your life together when everything is falling apart.
CGenius, moral responsibility, and the catastrophic weight of a decision you can never take back.
DEgo, legacy, and the terror of becoming irrelevant while you’re still alive to watch it happen.
EEvil, chance, and whether moral order actually exists or if we just tell ourselves it does.
NEXT QUESTION →
03
How do you like your story told?
Form is content. The way a story is shaped changes what it means.
AGenre-twisting — I want it to start in one lane and migrate into something completely different.
BMaximalist and genre-blending — comedy, action, drama, sci-fi, all in one ride.
CEpic and non-linear — cutting between timelines, building a mosaic of cause and consequence.
DA single unbroken flow — I want to feel like I’m living it in real time, no cuts to safety.
ESpare and precise — every scene doing exactly what it needs to do and nothing more.
NEXT QUESTION →
04
What makes a truly great antagonist?
The opposition defines the protagonist. What kind of opposition fascinates you?
AA system — invisible, structural, and almost impossible to fight because it has no single face.
BThe self — the ways we sabotage, abandon, and fail the people we love most.
CHistory — the unstoppable momentum of events that no single person can stop or redirect.
DThe industry — the machinery of culture that chews up talent and spits out irrelevance.
EPure, implacable evil — a force so certain of itself it becomes almost philosophical.
NEXT QUESTION →
05
What do you want from a film’s ending?
The final note is the one that lingers. What do you want it to sound like?
AShock and inevitability — a conclusion that recontextualises everything that came before it.
BEarned emotion — I want to cry, laugh, and feel genuinely hopeful, even if the world is a mess.
CDevastation and grandeur — an ending that makes me sit in silence for a few minutes after.
DAmbiguity — something that leaves enough open that I’m still thinking about it days later.
EBleakness — an honest refusal to pretend the world is tidier than it actually is.
NEXT QUESTION →
06
Which setting pulls you in most?
Where a film takes place shapes everything — mood, stakes, what’s even possible.
AA gleaming modern city with a hidden underside — beauty masking rot, wealth masking desperation.
BA collapsing suburban life that opens onto something infinite — the multiverse of a single ordinary person.
CThe corridors of power and science at a world-historical turning point — where decisions echo for decades.
DThe grimy, alive chaos of New York and Hollywood — fame as both destination and trap.
EVast, indifferent landscape — desert and highway where violence arrives without warning or reason.
NEXT QUESTION →
07
What cinematic craft impresses you most?
Every great film has a signature — a technical or artistic element that makes it unmistakable.
AProduction design and mise-en-scène — every frame composed to carry meaning beneath the surface.
BEditing and tonal control — the ability to move between registers without losing the audience.
CScore and sound design — music that becomes inseparable from the dread and awe of what you’re watching.
DCinematography as performance — the camera not recording events but participating in them.
ESilence and restraint — what’s left unsaid and unshown doing more work than any dialogue could.
NEXT QUESTION →
08
What kind of main character do you root for?
The protagonist is the lens. Who you choose to follow says something about you.
ASomeone smart and resourceful who makes increasingly dangerous decisions under pressure.
BSomeone overwhelmed and ordinary who turns out to be capable of something extraordinary.
CA brilliant, tortured figure whose gifts and flaws are inseparable from each other.
DA self-destructive artist whose ego is both their superpower and their undoing.
EA quiet, principled person trying to make sense of a world that has stopped making sense.
NEXT QUESTION →
09
How do you feel about a film that takes its time?
Pace is a choice. Some films sprint; others let tension accumulate slowly, deliberately.
AI love a slow build when I know the payoff is going to be seismic — patience for a devastating reveal.
BGive me relentless momentum — I want to feel breathless and emotionally spent by the end.
CEpic runtime doesn’t scare me — if the material demands three hours, give me three hours.
DI want it to feel propulsive even when nothing is technically happening — restless energy throughout.
EDeliberate and unhurried — I want dread to accumulate in the spaces between the action.
NEXT QUESTION →
10
What do you want to feel walking out of the cinema?
The best films leave a mark. What kind of mark do you want?
AUnsettled — like I’ve just seen something I can’t fully explain but can’t stop thinking about.
BMoved and energised — like the film reminded me what actually matters and gave me something to hold onto.
CHumbled — like I’ve been in the presence of something genuinely important and overwhelming.
DExhilarated — like I’ve just seen cinema doing something it’s never quite done before.
EHaunted — like a cold, quiet dread that stays with me for days.
REVEAL MY FILM →
The Academy Has Decided
Your Perfect Film Is…
Your answers have pointed to one Oscar Best Picture winner above all others. This is the film that was made for the way your mind works.
Parasite
You are drawn to films that operate on multiple levels simultaneously — that begin in one genre and quietly, brilliantly migrate into another. Bong Joon-ho’s Parasite is a film about class, desire, and the architecture of inequality that manages to be darkly funny, deeply suspenseful, and genuinely shocking across a single extraordinary running time. Your instinct is for cinema that hides its true intentions until the moment it’s ready to reveal them. Parasite is exactly that — a film that rewards close attention and punishes assumptions, right up to its devastating final image.
Everything Everywhere All at Once
You want it all — and this film gives you all of it. The Daniels’ Everything Everywhere All at Once is one of the most maximalist films ever made: action comedy, multiverse sci-fi, family drama, existential crisis, and a genuinely earned emotional core that sneaks up on you amid the chaos. You are someone who responds to ambition, who doesn’t want cinema to choose between being entertaining and being meaningful. This film refuses that choice entirely. It is overwhelming by design, and its overwhelming nature is precisely the point — because the feeling of being crushed by infinite possibility is exactly what it’s about.
Oppenheimer
You are drawn to cinema on a grand scale — films that understand history not as a backdrop but as a force, and that place their characters inside that force and watch what happens. Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer is a film about the terrifying gap between what we can do and what we should do, told with the full weight of one of the most consequential moments in human history behind it. You want your films to feel important without feeling self-important — to earn their ambition through sheer craft and the gravity of their subject. Oppenheimer does exactly that. It is enormous, complicated, and refuses easy comfort.
Birdman
You are drawn to films that foreground their own construction — that make the how of the filmmaking part of the what it’s about. Alejandro González Iñárritu’s Birdman, shot to appear as a single continuous take, is cinema examining itself through the cracked mirror of a fading actor’s ego. You respond to formal daring, to the feeling that a film is doing something that probably shouldn’t be possible. Michael Keaton’s performance and Emmanuel Lubezki’s restless camera create something genuinely unlike anything else — a film that is simultaneously about creativity, relevance, self-destruction, and the impossibility of ever truly knowing if your work means anything at all.
No Country for Old Men
You are drawn to cinema that trusts silence, that refuses to explain itself, and that treats dread as a form of meaning. The Coen Brothers’ No Country for Old Men is a film about the arrival of a new kind of evil — implacable, arbitrary, and utterly indifferent to the moral frameworks we use to make sense of the world. It is one of the most formally controlled films ever made, and its controlled restraint is what makes it so terrifying. You want your films to haunt you, not comfort you. You are not interested in resolution if resolution would be dishonest. No Country for Old Men is honest in a way that most cinema never dares to be.
↻ RETAKE THE QUIZ
2
Robert De Niro — ‘Righteous Kill’ (2008)
Image via Overture Films
There are plenty of great actors who’ve been in a lot of bad movies, and one of the greatest—who has been in some of the worst—is undoubtedly the legendary Robert De Niro. In masterpieces of the caliber of Taxi Driver and Raging Bull, De Niro has delivered some of the most universally acclaimed performances in the history of film acting. But at some point around the turn of the century, De Niro began taking on an increasing number of questionable roles and even-more-questionable projects. He starred alongside fellow legend Al Pacino in 2008’s Righteous Kill, and though it’s definitely not his worst project ever, it sure is his laziest work to date.
Very rarely, if ever, is De Niro actively bad; whenever he delivers a performance that’s widely deemed lackluster, it’s typically due to a clear lack of commitment and enthusiasm. Never has that been clearer than in Righteous Kill. De Niro is on autopilot here, showing none of the spark or emotional complexity that makes even his middle-of-the-road performances at least somewhat compelling. What’s worse is that Pacino, typically the master of hamming it up, is actually phoning it in here as well. The result is a painful lack of chemistry between two stars who had been electric together just 13 years prior in Michael Mann’s Heat.
1
Marlon Brando — ‘Christopher Columbus: The Discovery’ (1992)
Marlon Brando wearing a friar robe, looking pensively at something off screen, surrounded by dark and black decor.Image via Warner Bros. Pictures
Even all these many years later, many cinephiles and film historians still think that Marlon Brando was the greatest and most influential actor in the history of Hollywood cinema. As revolutionary as his raw, psychologically intense approach to his characters was, however, he was also an actor that was notoriously difficult to work with. His unconventional methods (which included refusing to learn his lines and constantly ignoring directors’ instructions) caused too many budget and schedule disruptions to count over the course of his career.
There’s no denying that he was the GOAT, but it’s also undeniable that Brando delivered not just one, but several terrible performances over the years, some of them awfully phoned-in. None were ever lazier or more dull, however, than his work as Tomás de Torquemada in John Glen’s terrible period piece Christopher Columbus: The Discovery. Brando, who was fed his lines through an earpiece, reportedly phoned in his performance out of protest for a script that he disliked. He sleepwalks his way through The Discovery, speaking every line and delivering every gesture with the charm and energy of a rock.
Christopher Columbus: The Discovery
Release Date
August 20, 1992
Runtime
120 minutes
Director
John Glen
Writers
Cary Bates
Cast
Georges Corraface
Christopher Columbus
Rachel Ward
Queen Isabella