I don’t see how you can argue with Roger Ebert; the man only won a Pulitzer Prize for his work critiquing movies. The thing about Ebert and most critics is they hate unoriginal movies and they like very few remakes. When you see almost every film made every year for a very long time, you know your movies and you know every cliché in the book. Guys like him can see things coming a mile away. It also doesn’t help that the horror genre is probably the most clichéd genre of them all. When’s the last time you saw something truly original in a horror film... that didn’t involve the method someone gets killed. Most critics hate horror films just on principle. The only things they hate more are the overblown, over hyped epics and teen sex comedies; even more clichéd genres.
Additionally when it comes to the worst movie lists, they tend to choose big name films that stink rather than really crappy independent movies you’ve never heard of and for good reasons. I always find this odd because most critics go out of their way to find those great independent movies you’ve never heard of. My opinion on the film was it was ok, nothing special but I can see why critics would not like it. I think Alien vs. Predator was the worst film of the year.
By now someone’s thinking I loved this movie it should not be on the bottom 10. So I leave you with some wise words from Adam Carolla: "You have Dogs Playing Poker and you have a Picasso. Now you might like Dogs Playing Poker more than a Picasso but it doesn’t change the fact the Picasso is an excellent work of art and the other is a piece of crap."
PS I am a big SMG fan and I’m not trying to be a hater. It’s just my opinion, I may be wrong.