I actually just watched Alone in the Dark. And truthfully, it is far better that Boll's last film House of the Dead. Especially if you use my 5-step grade system.
1. Total crap
2. Bad
3. Average
4. Good
5. Excellant.
Most movies fall in the 2-5/'Bad through Good' range. Catwoman was all-round bad (2), In Good Company was average (3), and Interview with the Vampire was good (4). The movie-making extremes "Awesome & Awful" god beyond the call of mearly bad or good filmmaking. Excellant movies are technically flawless, impressively acted, original, though provoking. A Total crap movie on the other hand is made with improper or poor techniques, have unskilled acting, are usually plageristic of someone elses work, and generally make the viewer angry (that the film is so bad).
But rarity is the key. If every movie is total crap or awesome, then total crap and awesomeness must be changed. Because there must always be a film "elite", the bar must be raised/lowered accordingly. (This is how Freddy Got Fingered doesn't make the list).
House of the Dead remains my personal criteria for Godawful movie and its crimes against film are many:
*Film intercut with videogame footage. At first its used as a change-over device, but by halfway through the film it seems to be inserted randomly (including in the middle of shots and interupting dialogue).
*Cameraman unable to keep distance from the actors. Their breathing fogs the lens on a few occassions.
*Bizarre "Student Art Film" moment: Camera spins around certain characters who die, and when certain characters find guns.
There are several more reasons, but thats a subject for another thread. To sum-up my point: When compared to HOTD, AITD is merely a bad movie.