I try to avoid criticizing films negatively, not just out of fear of hurting anyone’s feelings but also from a clear understanding that what I might dislike could be loved by someone else. Personal bias is always present when you pen a piece like this. However, when it comes to Tyler Perry’s “Mea Culpa,” I must pause to reflect and sift through the entire film I’ve seen to articulate thoughts that might resonate more profoundly than the film itself.

Mea Harper (Kelly Rowland), a lawyer, contemplates taking the case of an artist, Zyair Malloy (Trevante Rhodes), accused of killing his girlfriend. Initially reluctant, Mea’s decision is swayed when she discovers that her brother-in-law, Ray (Nick Sagar), is set to prosecute Zyair. Ironically, the film’s only engaging aspect is the desire it instills in viewers to file a lawsuit against it for rendering the audience astonishingly bemused.

I feel compelled to outline why “Mea Culpa” could be the worst film you’ll see in 2024, a challenging feat given the competition from “Madame Web.” Firstly, Mea is an enigmatic character, and it’s perplexing why Tyler Perry would conceive her. With all due respect to Kelly Rowland, her portrayal of Mea depicts someone constantly battered by life – from her husband, her abusive mother-in-law Azalia, and virtually everyone else. She attempts to defend Zyair, but who will shield her from her own battles?

The film’s premise doesn’t aim for her to discover her inner strength; she believes she already possesses it, contrary to what is portrayed. Moving on to what Tyler Perry might have intended but missed: envision a scenario where a client brazenly asks his lawyer if she finds him attractive, continuing to press or manipulate when he doesn’t receive a clear affirmation. Such dialogue is bewildering – where did these lines originate?

In essence, “Mea Culpa” is less a film and more a shadow of one. It represents a work of art that should have remained conceptual, a story not worthy of being told. As for the actors – it’s regrettable. They undoubtedly had better engagements than participating in a film that culminates in utter disaster. The storyline is incoherent, and the acting is abysmal; there are no words to describe it other than a total flop. While I strive not to draft negative reviews, this film implored me to do otherwise. The lingering question is, why? Why would anyone wish to subject themselves to a film that ought to remain hidden in obscurity, sparing its cast and crew further embarrassment? Such films are better left undiscovered, safeguarding all involved from additional ignominy.