Overrated/Underrated Geek Media

[Bedrockgames]

I remember in 2005 when George A. Romero's "Land of the Dead" came out. In an interview, director Robert Rodriguez said, "It's been 35 years and people are still talking about Night of the Living Dead. No one is talking about The English Patient."

Dances with Wolves being less remembered than Goodfellas is another one (and I think Goodfellas lost an oscar to it if I remember correctly)

 

[Some Dude]

Dances with Wolves being less remembered than Goodfellas is another one (and I think Goodfellas lost an oscar to it if I remember correctly)

In general, lowbrow" or genre entertainment tends to be more memorable, or at least have scenes that get etched into the collective psyche.

The shower scene from Psycho.
"Heeeere's Johnny!"
"You better get a bigger boat."

Etc.

 

[Bohandas]

Dances with Wolves being less remembered than Goodfellas is another one (and I think Goodfellas lost an oscar to it if I remember correctly)

And that's exactly the kind of thing I was talking about when I was dismissive of movie critics a couple pages back. They make bad calls like passing over Goodfellas for Dances With Wolves all the time.

There's a formula for making films that win oscars, and it's not the same formula as for making films that people want to see

 

[Bedrockgames]

And that's exactly the kind of thing I was talking about when I was dismissive of movie critics a couple pages back. They make bad calls like passing over Goodfellas for Dances With Wolves all the time.

There's a formula for making films that win oscars, and it's not the same formula as for making films that people want to see

I think being honest about what you like is good, so I do appreciate your perspective here. Pretending to like something because you think it makes you smart or it's what cultured critics like, doesn't enrich your life. But I also think that doesn't mean things that might be called 'high brow' are automatically bad. It really boils down to how the stuff makes you feel. I always look at how a movie makes me feel when I am trying to decide if I like it (not if the ideas are clever or complex, just how it makes me feel emotionally and whether my mind keeps thinking about it and going back to it).

For me 70s cinema is interesting because you have all these gritty crime movies like The French Connection, Mean Streets and Dirty Harry, but you also have stuff like Enter the Dragon, Rocky, Young Frankenstein, then you have odd movies like A Clockwork Orange or Taxi Driver; and there is horror like The Exorcist, Halloween, Alien, Jaws and Black Christmas; plus there is the kung fu explosion out of Hong Kong (tons of great movies here). There is just so much cool stuff, and a lot of it feels very character driven. And I am leaving out a lot. And there are lots of cool exploitation films from that era like Foxy Brown and Death Wish. I have a much easier time watching films like this than I do a modern marvel movie (and that might be because these were movies I often saw or heard a lot about as a kid in the 80s).

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

And that's exactly the kind of thing I was talking about when I was dismissive of movie critics a couple pages back. They make bad calls like passing over Goodfellas for Dances With Wolves all the time.

The movie critics didn't do that.

Go back and look at the reviews from the time. Dances with Wolves was routinely reviewed as being a not-terribly-deep story that audiences had seen multiple times before and Goodfellas received widespread praise.

Academy voters are or were actual working professionals -- not critics -- and are extremely sensitive, as a general rule, to what's popular, so long as it's not a genre picture. Dances with Wolves won because it was super-popular, not because it was great art. See also Titanic.

 

[Bedrockgames]

The movie critics didn't do that.

Go back and look at the reviews from the time. Dances with Wolves was routinely reviewed as being a not-terribly-deep story that audiences had seen multiple times before and Goodfellas received widespread praise.

Academy voters are or were actual working professionals -- not critics -- and are extremely sensitive, as a general rule, to what's popular, so long as it's not a genre picture. Dances with Wolves won because it was super-popular, not because it was great art. See also Titanic.

I remember Dances with Wolves and Goodfellas both doing well with critics. Is there a link to contemporary reviews ?

 

[payn]

Oh Goodfellas made me think of Ray Liotta. I good a good one for y'all.

Ray liotta as Aldo "Hollywood Dick" Molitsanti in Many Saints of Newark overrated.

Ray Liotta as Salvatore "Sal" Molitsanti In Many Saints of Newark underrated.

@Snarf Zagyg

 

[Clint_L]

I remember Dances with Wolves and Goodfellas both doing well with critics. Is there a link to contemporary reviews ?

Rotten Tomatoes publishes old reviews.

But yeah, Goodfellas was, and is, the critical darling whereas Dances was very much the more populist pick. Also, Goodfellas is by one of the definitive 70s auteurs, Scorsese, and would fit right into that decade. It’s quite a bit ironic to cite it as an example of critics getting it wrong and 70s movies being bad.

Edit: also, I want to address this ridiculous notion that critics are just a bunch of snobs who don't like popular movies. Go look at Rotten Tomatoes, and you will find that every single one of the fist 20 or so films in the MCU is rated "fresh" by critical consensus, and a number of them are over 90%. Toy Story 1&2 are at 100% positive reviews. If a film is good, it gets good reviews from critics, regardless of whether it is a tentpole film or a franchise blockbuster.

It's true that they also give reviews to a lot of low budget and independent films, but many critics feel that they have a responsibility to bring attention to films that audiences tend to ignore. In fact, many claim that one of the best things about their job is when they help bring attention to a truly new voice. And I applaud them for it.

Critics watch a LOT of movies, and most have studied and written about film their whole lives. Art is subjective, and I disagree with tons of reviews. But on aggregate, they get it right most of the time. It's almost like being an expert has value.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I haven't seen either Goodfellas or Dances With Wolves. I'm not interested in Gangsters or Westerns.

70s films? This is the decade that gave us Jaws, my partner's favourite film, along with the original Star Wars. The Bond films were of decreasing gravitas, but where hardly slow paced, especially compared to 1969's ponderous OHMSS. Star Trek the Motion Picture (79) is the film that is guilty as charged, of being slow, ponderous with long periods of nothing happening, and also of impersonating 2001: a Space Odyssey.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

In general, lowbrow" or genre entertainment tends to be more memorable, or at least have scenes that get etched into the collective psyche.

The shower scene from Psycho.
"Heeeere's Johnny!"
"You better get a bigger boat."

Etc.

I wouldn't consider any of those three films lowbrow.

And the correct quote is "you're going to need a bigger boat".