10 Worst TV Shows Based On Movies, Ranked

Hollywood loves milking ideas until they gasp for air and beg to be put down. If a movie turns out to be a big hit, expect an endless slew of sequels or for it to be turned into a TV show at some point. To be fair, the latter sometimes works, such as in the instances of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” and “What We Do in the Shadows,” which are arguably better than the original movies. Yet for every success, there are also five duds that make the viewer wonder what they did to deserve such cruel and unusual punishment.

With so many TV shows based on movies, how do you know which to avoid, or at least approach with reasonable expectations? We have picked the worst of the worst — the ones we still talk about to this day for how terrible they are — and ranked them by their Rotten Tomatoes scores. So, this isn’t just a singular person hating on a few shows here; it’s the general consensus of critics that these series are bona fide stinkers.

With that said, here are the worst TV shows based on movies, ranked from least-worst to bottom-of-the-barrel bad. All’s fair in love and entertainment, so if you choose to watch these programs, have at it. Don’t say we didn’t warn you, though!

Bradley Cooper’s Eddie Morra sees his life change after he takes the special NZT-48 drug that improves his brain function in 2011’s “Limitless.” The premise intrigues, but the story covers all its bases across its 105-minute runtime. Essentially, the message is you can achieve anything you set your mind to, though be careful of performance-enhancing substances that will wreck you in the end. Drugs are bad, okay?

It’s difficult to imagine a follow-up here, since it seems conclusive by the ending of “Limitless.” However, where there’s money, there’s a way. Set after the events of the movie, the 2015 “Limitless” series follows a new protagonist, Brian Finch (Jake McDorman), who receives NZT-48 but also the immunity shot from Eddie Morra. So what does he do? He uses his special abilities to help the FBI solve crimes, but he tries to keep mum about how he knows things.

From that brief plot synopsis alone, there’s no hiding the fact that “Limitless” is now a run-of-the-mill crime procedural. That turned out to be one of the chief criticisms of the show, since it forgoes the intelligent hook and what-if factor of the movie to become a by-the-numbers, slightly derivative version of “Chuck.” It’s unnecessary and comes across as nothing more than a deliberate cash-in on the film’s popularity. Ultimately, “Limitless” mustered only 58% critical approval on Rotten Tomatoes and lasted a single season. Even without NZT-48, everybody could see that coming a mile away.

Remember 1987’s “Fatal Attraction” where Dan Gallagher (played by Michael Douglas) cheats on his wife Beth (Anne Archer) with Alex Forrest (Glenn Close), and the affair turns deadly? It’s a cautionary tale about what happens when extramarital affairs go south.

“Fatal Attraction” is also widely considered a classic in the erotic thriller genre, racking up a string of Oscar nominations; it won none in the end. You have to be brave to attempt a redo of a genre favorite, and the 2023 Paramount+ remake looked to be on the right track when it cast Joshua Jackson and Lizzy Caplan as Dan and Alex, respectively. Also, credit where credit is due as the “Fatal Attraction” series fleshes out Alex’s disorder, rather than paint her out as the same obsessed and villainous mistress who tries to wreck a marriage from the movie.

Unquestionably, the miniseries attempts to modernize the story, examining the complexity of the relationship between the characters and how the blame cannot be shifted all onto Alex here. Yet the more it adds, the more the story becomes unrecognizable. Maybe “Fatal Attraction” didn’t need a redo; instead, it should have been an original narrative that explored a similar premise and charted its own commentary on the issue. On Rotten Tomatoes, the show holds 38% on the Tomatometer, confirming the majority of critics didn’t find a natural attraction to this adaptation.

Liam Neeson’s Bryan Mills either has the worst luck in the world, or he’s terrible at keeping track of his loved ones, because honestly, how many times can the people around him be taken!? While the first “Taken” movie thrills and gets the heart beating faster, the sequels take a legitimately terrifying concept and turn it cartoonish and unbelievable.

Expanding the “Taken” timeline is the eponymous 2017 TV show. This prequel sees Clive Standen take over from Neeson as Bryan and uncovers what he got up to in his CIA days. It’s a straight-up action and espionage show that occasionally features someone being taken, because of course it has to.

The 2008 “Taken” film works because Bryan comes out of retirement to save his daughter, Kim (Maggie Grace). Not only has he been out of the field for a while, making fans question how sharp he still is, but he also has to come to terms with the possibility that he might not get to Kim in time. There’s a vulnerability to the character that connects with the viewer. In the show, he’s a strapping young lad who’s heading off on missions and beating up bad guys because it’s his job. Sure, there’s a tragedy that pushes him into this line of work, but it’s the same basis for any other action thriller. Also, let’s be real here: Clive Standen is no Liam Neeson. While “Taken” aired for two seasons, critics only gave it 32% approval on Rotten Tomatoes.

Sometimes, movies are products of their time and only work in that specific era. “Heathers” is a prime example of this, operating as a pitch-black comedy of the high school experience in the ’80s. Winona Ryder plays Veronica Sawyer, who gets roped into a scheme by the new bad boy, J.D. (Christian Slater), to kill the mean girls club known as the Heathers.

While in the ’80s and early ’90s, this might have induced laughs. It’s different in 2018, especially taking into account all the real-life school violence that’s become an epidemic in America. So the idea of a TV reboot of “Heathers” was always going to be a tough sell — and it became infinitely tougher after the initial series debut was delayed after a tragic school shooting.

After “Heathers” arrived on TV, any curiosity one might have had about it turned into a giant collective headshake. In an effort to change the dynamics of the show, the Heathers — the bullies of the story — are presented as social justice warriors and part of the LGBTQ+ community. It isn’t subversive or clever social commentary at all; it’s just a bad idea that should have been nuked in the pitch meeting. Critics didn’t warm up to “Heathers” either, dishing out 30% critical approval on Rotten Tomatoes. The show only lasted one season, and the less said about this reboot, the better. Bin it, and never talk about it again.

The “Rush Hour” movies shine because of the electric pairing of Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker. Chan brings his signature high-energy stunt work and slapstick brand of physical comedy, while Tucker prattles off the jokes a million miles a minute in his distinct high-pitch voice. There’s no special formula or secret sauce here; it’s abundantly clear that Chan and Tucker are the sole reasons that people tune in to watch these films.

Almost a decade after “Rush Hour 3,” somebody had the bright idea of turning the franchise into a TV show that aired in 2016. Chan and Tucker wouldn’t return as Lee and Carter, though, being replaced by Jon Foo and Justin Hires. See the problem already? No disrespect to Foo and Hires, but they aren’t Chan and Tucker. The chemistry isn’t there on the screen, and since “Rush Hour” as a concept is flimsy as is, every other deficit becomes that much more noticeable when the leads aren’t clicking.

The show didn’t receive a second season to see if it could iron out the initial problems, and that’s probably for the best. This was never going to work without Chan and Tucker, so it was time to cut the losses and move on. Unsurprisingly, “Rush Hour” received 27% on Rotten Tomatoes’ Tomatometer, with the general consensus being a giant question mark over why this exists. Looking back now, the decision to greenlight this series is still one of the most bizarre moves made by CBS.

Look, 2015’s “The Odd Couple” isn’t the first sitcom to attempt to replicate the success of the 1968 film, starring Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau, that sees two divorced men try to live together. All things considered, though, it’s the worst of the lot, judging by the 26% critical approval rating of the first season on Rotten Tomatoes.

In the show, “Friends” star Matthew Perry portrays the messy Oscar Madison, while Thomas Lennon of “Reno 911!” fame plays the tidy Felix Unger. Much like other adaptations, the hook here is seeing how this comedic duo learns to live together when they’re the polar opposite of each other. The sitcom isn’t short on star power either, as the likes of Wendell Pierce, Teri Hatcher, Yvette Nicole Brown, and Lauren Graham also appear at some point.

All in all, Perry and Lennon bring their A-game to the fray, but they’re working with D-list material. The jokes are unfunny, while the stories have been done by other shows countless times before. Resultantly, this feels too familiar. To be entirely fair, the starkly-different-people-trying-to-cohabitate setup has been done to death by the sitcom genre as a plethora of series have featured variations of it, so it’s tough to break any new ground and do something original here. Despite this, CBS only canceled “The Odd Couple” after three seasons, giving it a longer run than it deserved.

As far as legal thrillers go, 1994’s “The Client” remains a highlight from the ’90s, especially as Susan Sarandon’s Reggie Love goes the extra mile to protect her client, the 11-year-old Mark Sway (Brad Renfro). Plus, it’s fireworks to see Reggie tussle with the bombastic rival attorney Roy Foltrigg (Tommy Lee Jones), who leaves an impressive mark on the film, too.

In 1995, “The Client” returned — but to the small screen. The show centers on Reggie — this time played by JoBeth Williams — while John Heard takes over the role of Foltrigg. While the big-screen adaptation focuses on one specific case, this series is more procedural and digs deeper into Reggie’s past and her starting her own practice to do good.

By relegating “The Client” to a procedural format, however, it lacks the oomph and gravitas of the film, which even garnered Sarandon an Oscar nomination for her performance. Essentially, this becomes another show in a deluge of legal dramas on network television, with the only thing making it stand out is its name. The Los Angeles Times called the show “clueless,” while other reviewers also weren’t kind in their assessments, securing “The Client” a 25% critical approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes. After one season, the series received its marching orders from CBS.

Director Richard Donner changed the horror genre with “The Omen,” following in the footsteps of “The Exorcist.” The 1976 film introduces Damien Thorn (Harvey Spencer Stephens), a young boy who’s the spawn of Satan. This despicable child gets up to all types of mischief and raises hell — literally and figuratively — by inflicting pain and suffering on others. In the third “Omen film, “The Final Conflict,” a grown-up Damien (Sam Neill) becomes powerful by becoming the CEO of a company and harbors grand ambitions as the Antichrist.

This is what makes the 2016 “Damien” TV show all the more puzzling since it ignores the events of the sequels. In this series, an adult Damien (played by Bradley James) has no idea that he’s the Devil’s son, nor his insidious past, but there are forces trying to remind him of who he is and his birthright as the Antichrist. The first — and only — season follows Damien as he reconciles the past and toys between good and evil.

Let’s be real, though. When it comes to a darker horror story like “The Omen,” network TV’s restrictions often hamper the show’s ability to go to more sinister places. Consequently, “Damien” never feels scary or ominous like the original movies did. Plus, there’s something to be said about kids committing evil acts on screen; that always feels more eerie and spooky. Ultimately, the critics held up their crucifixes at the show, giving it only 14% critical approval on Rotten Tomatoes.

John Hughes’ “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” remains the ultimate slacker comedy. It’s one of the best teen movies of all time and holds up in the modern era, as everybody dreams of playing hooky from school or work for a day. At the same time, it’s one of those rare movies that doesn’t need a sequel.

In 1990, a TV series titled “Ferris Bueller” debuted. It attempts to be meta by addressing Matthew Broderick playing the titular character in the movie, but it quickly devolves into just another sitcom as Charlie Schlatter’s Ferris goes through the motions of high school and teenage life in general. A notable highlight, though, is the appearance of a pre-fame Jennifer Aniston, who plays Ferris’ sister, Jeannie.

Much like the other shows mentioned above, “Ferris Bueller” cashes in on the brand name, demonstrating a lack of spirit or resemblance to the source material. The original film is about taking risks and going against authority to take a day off — that’s where the humor and life lessons come from. In this series, you could change the names of the characters, and no one would know better, since it fails to resemble Ferris Bueller and his friends from the movie. On Rotten Tomatoes, “Ferris Bueller” holds a measly 10% critical approval rating. Critics probably thanked their lucky stars that they only needed to review one season of this pitiful show.

“Uncle Buck” is one of John Candy’s best movies, as the 1989 comedy paired up the comedian with filmmaker John Hughes once again. Candy plays Buck Russell, a man who’s allergic to responsibility. He’s forced to step up after a family tragedy leaves him looking after his nieces and nephews. Expectedly, hijinks follow as Buck’s way of life clashes with looking after children, but the experience changes Buck and the family for the better.

The reason “Uncle Buck” sticks its landing is that Hughes and Candy worked well together. There was a synergy between the filmmaker and actor, and this magical spark extended to other parts of the film too. Remove this element and, well, 1990’s “Uncle Buck” happens. The TV show follows a similar premise to the movie, as Kevin Meaney portrays Buck and looks after his brother’s kids. However, this show adds another tragic element: killing off the Russell kids’ parents, leaving Buck in charge full-time, and giving him a sidekick in the form of Maggie Hogoboom (Audrey Meadows), who is the kids’ grandmother.

By all means, “Uncle Buck” wasn’t a universally beloved movie, but the show is pretty much reviled by all. It’s one of the rare series that holds the dishonor of having 0% on Rotten Tomatoes’ Tomatometer. It fails to capture the spirit of the original movie, devolving into an unfunny sitcom that throws everything against the wall to see what sticks. Fortunately, it only received a single season on the air.