0005. Some Under-Rated Films
Submitted by lbangs on Tue, 02/20/2001 - 09:16
Tags:
- LA Story - Cheesy? Sure, but this film raises cheese to new heights while lacing it with strong hints of sharp satire. Supported by a great script and cast, this is the film most romantic comedies can only dream of being.
- 8MM - How far have most American film critics shoved their heads up their rears? See the critical massacre that greeted this dark, uncompromising film.
- A Life Less Ordinary - What a screwball comedy should look like in the 90s. Gleefully unrestrained, this film soared right over the critics' heads.
- Emma - Easily, easily the best of the 90s JA adaptions, and still the film Paltrow deserved the Oscar for.
- Rope - Hitchcock's most under-rated film. At the time, critics found the constant camera movements disturbing and distracting. Now in the post-Scorsese era, the film shines as the daring, tense experiment it is, complete with one of Stewart's best performances.
- Amateur, Simple Men, Trust - Hal Hartley is simply one of the greatest directors ever, working so high on his own plane that many critics (Ebert included) have admitted to not understanding him. Please, everybody, try at least one of these Hartley films! I'm begging here!
- City of Lost Children - An adult fairytale full of childhood dreams; this film surrounds you in a world you left years ago and have been both trying to get back to and to run away from ever since.
- The Mask of Zorro - I recently caught this one on Showtime, and I have seldom been more pleasantly surprised. For this epic swashbuckler, someone actually managed to write a story and recruit decent actors. The results is a pleasing adventure film that seems like the love child of The Adventures of Robin Hood and Raiders of the Lost Ark. The best Zorro film I've ever seen, and easily the best adventure film I've seen in quite a while.
- The Horse Whisperer: Yes, this is rather long. And yes, it is the type of drama Hollywood usually turns into sappy sugar. But Redford directs this with a sure and steady hand, the actors are excellent, and over the course of three hours, the entire gang wear down every bit of cynical shielding the viewer might be wearing, leaving all open to this gentle, moving film that most ignored upon its original release. The DVD shows off the film's eye-watering visuals extremely well in beautiful wide-screen glory.
Author Comments:
I've roasted plenty of sacred cows, so I guess it is my turn to risk the open fire and point out some films largely laughed at that deserve a second viewing. It's only fair. I'll be adding more soon. Fire away!
Being There - I've seen this movie several times -the first time, I absolutely hated it - the second and all the subsequent times, I loved it - guess it was my frame of mind the first night (some 20 years ago). Peter Sellers - extremely talented man - he was one of those actors that I sincerely felt sad when he died. If I'm not mistaken, this was his last film (?)
I believe he had a few more roles after Being There, although BT did give him an Oscar nomination for Best Actor!
I understand about not liking a film on first viewing you eventually end up loving. For this reason, I try not to be too out-spoken about disliking a well-respected film until I have seen it at least twice. Goodness knows it's not because I'm shy or soft-spoken!
I'm thrilled somebody enjoys this gem of a film!
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
EMMA - UGH! It is my least favorite of the Austen adaptations, w. A&E's Pride and Prejudice being my favorite, followed by Persuasion and Sense and Sensibility...
BUT... I LOVE L.A. Story, agree about 8MM (it completely creeped me out)and really dug A Life Less Ordinary. Then again, Ewan singing is always good.
I'm glad we agree on many films here. As for my love of Emma, I am equally shocked hearing people praise the lame Sense and Sensibility. What do people love here?
I know what I dislike in it.
1) Miscasting: Several actors simply are in the wrong roles, while others ham it up to high heaven.
2) Script: This is what high schoolers see when they read an Austen novel - a period piece with great costumes and fine manners on display. Austen, however, is much smarter than that. She writes with hidden razors, and if she never cuts too deep, she does indeed occasionally draw blood. Thompson's screenplay doted on manners and style while missing the the very qualities that elevates Austen from, say, modern romance novels. Additionally, the film's humor is broad and banal where Austen's was subtle and brilliant.
3) Hollywood: Hollywood has a certain structure it tends to require out of films, and S&S simply does not fit well into this structure. This is most obvious at the end, where the film acts as if we are in suspense about the outcome. We're not (anyone who has seen or read much could guess this 'mysterious' ending a mile away), but Hollywood must have a huge climax. As a result of the need for climax and a '3 act' film, Austen is very ill-fit for this type of conventional film, and it shows in bizarre pacing and uncomfortable transitions.
On the positive side, a few of the actors were great, and the cinematography was beautiful.
Emma, on the other hand, didn't have a single one of the problems i listed above and also had great actors, plus cinematography that looked great without stealing away the entire film.
Anyway, that's my long-winded take on it. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree!
Thanks for the great comments. I'm especially glad to see at least one other person enjoyed A Life Less Ordinary.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
I saw 8MM and thought it was terrific, if painful. Glad I saw it once, don't ever want to see it again. :-) You weren't kidding about the undeserved massacre. Thanks! I never would have rented it without your recommendation.
I'm very pleased you ignored the critical chorus and rented this surprising film. Yes, it is very dark, and I have felt no need to see it again yet, but 8 MM is an excellent film I fear nobody saw due to the mauling reviews that greeted its release. Thanks for letting me know your thoughts. This list has finally served its purpose!
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
I have seen this movie also, and like the two of you I thought it was an excellent movie but I have no desire to see it again because it was so disturbing. Possibly one of the reasons it was so ignored was simply the subject matter. Most people go to the movies to have a good time and don't want to see a movie that very well may alter their view of the world. Maybe the avoidance of the movie is in fact an avoidance of the admittance that snuff films really are out there.
Actually 41% on Rotten Tomatoes is not that bad of a critical drubbing. I've seen much, much (much) worse.
A 41% does strike me as rather low for such a great film, though.
But, to be honest, I don't really follow Rotten Tomatoes much, so I really wouldn't know...
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
RT works by aggregating reviews from online sources (mostly professional, I think). If the review is positive that counts as a 1, and if it's negative it counts as a 0. The percentage rating is determined by taking an average of all the reviews (so two positives and one negative would yield a rating of 66%). I believe anything with a rating of less that 60% is considered "rotten", while 60% or greater is "fresh". So while 41% is certainly not as low as you can go, I think you can still safely include it on an "Under-Rated" list.
Thanks for the explanation, Jim. I figured anything under 50% couldn't be all that great...
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
This list continues to serve me well, as A Life Less Ordinary finds a home. Thanks!
Amateur was quite good. I'm still absorbing it. Not sure if I loved it, but I definitely liked it. I don't know how to characterize the acting style Hartley must encourage in his actors, but it reminded me alot of David Mamet's movies. However, where I hate that style in Mamet movies, it worked better for me here.
My first Hartley film was Trust, and the film refused to leave me. While I certainly didn't love it on first viewing, it did deeply move me, and for the life of me, I couldn't figure out how. Hartley is certainly unconventional. His characters tend to speak in a deadpan style, and his films seem hushed and muted. Confused, I watched Trust again and quickly fell in love. Simple Men and Amateur followed, and now, I'm a believer.
I've compared his sparse, artificial style to a ballet before - artificial, controlled, yet, eventually, all the more moving for it. While most of his films are very stylized, they are subdued, I believe, to allow the emotions and intellectual explorations to simmer rather than boil, and the entire brew ends up extremely concentrated and effective.
I'm thrilled you gave Amateur a chance, and am even more delighted that you seem to have enjoyed it to some degree. If it has intrigued you half as much as it fascinated me, I do strongly suggest viewing Simple Men and Trust. Hartley rewrites the rules of cinema, and when he pulls his recreation off, I believe he soars. He is a film universe unto himself.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
I love you L bangs and dig your views on movies. However, I must re enforce my loathe for Hal Hartley. Watching one of his movies to me is like playing Dominos with a squid.
Whoa. I'm amazed by your latest entry. From the trailers and reviews I had written it off as overlong schlock. Now I have to reevaluate. Damn you. :-)
:)
I found it a bit amazing, frankly, since I can't stand the book the film is based on, but I found HW to be quite involving. It no Citizen Kane, sure, but I thought that this was the rare film where the length running time worked greatly to its advantage. You have time to grow into the film. Granted, Redford-directed films tend towards the love-it-hate-it category, but if you enjoyed Ordinary People, A River Runs Through It, or Quiz Show, I would say The Horse Whisper is worth a try.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs (always working to make everybody's must-see lists yards longer...)
My two cents on The Horse Whisperer says you should see it. I can not totally agree that the length is understandable, I would like to have seen 20 or 30 minutes cut off but it is well done for its story of Reedford/little Girl and Horse more than Redford and Scott Thomas story. I liked the movie but I like the other three you mentioned more.
I pretty much agree with your last sentence. I probably do like Ordinary People and Quiz Show better than Horse Whisperer, but they already have oodles of critical attention. I feel like The Horse Whisperer has been unjustly ignored.
I also should warn everybody that I am a man of amazing patience. As long as something is involving me, I don't usually mind three-hour films. Of course, most three-hour films cannot begin to justify their lengths and cease to be involving after the hour mark, but I though The Horse Whisperer earned its three hours. Still, beware. If you hate long films, this probably won't change your mind.
I'm glad you liked the film. I was curious whether you had seen it or not.
An odd thing I just discovered - When the film ran in the theater, the opening New York scenes were severely cropped (I believe the aspect was close to television's boxy dimensions) to create a cramped, crammed feeling. When the film slid into the West, the film became gloriously wide-screeened. It is too bad that the DVD did not recreate this effect, remaining wide-screened throughout the entire film.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
Ive seen lots and lots of movies the blessings of an insominiac I guess.
Actually as to this list I have seen everyone on them
I agree with a lot of your assessmnets(What a surprise) but I highly recommend Zorro and 8MM. Zorro I saw in the theatre and was totally shocked how good it was...Zeta Jones had so much promise in this flick. I hope some day she lives up to it. Amazing thing about 8MM I read dsomewhere Gandolfini though this was the worst movie he made. So it wasnt only the critics who missed the point of this flick. Harcore with George C. Scott is another great choice in this venue.
I agree whole heartedly on the Rope. Great Hitchcock with some of his best deadpan humor.
I loved Being There but I am not sure you can call it under-rated. I remeber it being a critical and I also think a small commercial success when it came out.
As to Hal Hartley, I obviously know your appreciation for him, so I have stayed away from discussing him too much. I am a fan, I loved Trust and Amateur. I always think of him as a Jazz Director, You know mood peices that seems to meander about but you always enjoy the trip. As Jazz is a specialized taste for only certain times, I can extend the correlation to Hartley's films.
The blessings of an insominiac. I never really thought of it that way. I got into foreign and silent films in junior high. I never could sleep, and only our living room television had cable. Since my parents' room was nearby, I quickly realized that I could watch silent and subtitled films with the volume completely down, thus negating any chance of waking up everybody in the house. Soon, I was hooked for life.
I wonder if there is any connection beteen die-hard film buffs and insominia. I know several folks who would test positive in both areas.
The Mask of Zorro was a complete shock to me. I remember rolling my eyes at the commercial at the time. I can't believe they actually pulled it off.
You're probably right about Being There. It is recognized critically, and I'm not sure, but I do believe it did fairly well commercially. It was an early entry; I was probably hoping that by typing in something I would prompt some creative brainstorm for the rest of the list. It is out of place. I'll consider removing it.
I'm thrilled that you dig Hartley. Oddly enough, most people I largely agree with about movies hate Hartley, so I'm a bit surprised as well as thrilled. Your jazz analogy is rather apt; Hartley is certainly an acquired taste, but worth the effort to acclimatize with.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
Hmm. That might have happened to me if we'd ever had cable. I just resorted to reading under the covers with a flashlight and other things of that nature.
My parents caught on to the flashlight trick too early, but I got around that. Yeah, in elementary school, when my parents would not let me stay up, I would stash a book under my pillow until they had kissed me goodnight and the used the dim light of my digital clock to read each line with. There was only light enough for one line at a time, and I would simply slide the clock down the page.
Good God, no wonder I am such a nerd!
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
I did that too :) I remember reading very slowly by that faint red glow..
Wow! I'm not alone!
My eyes are probably shot for life, and I just don't know it yet.
Man, I remember reading Ian Fleming novels and The Iliad, among others, for the first time by a faint red glow. Those were the glorious days, when nearly every novel was unread, every film unseen, and every album unheard.
Luckily, there are still many more to go.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
Ooh, you said the magic words with "hated the book." My wife read it and hated it as well, so your sharing that view ups the chances that I'll actually be able to get it into the player. :-)
And I did hate that book. The author may have a story, but he has zero style and too many florid words. The novel should have come in a purple hardback to warn people of the primped prose within. A very sorry book, actually.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
I just had a thought . . . Does this mean I also have to reconsider all the red flags that went off when I watched the trailer for The Legend of Bagger Vance?
I don't know. I haven't ignored those warning signs yet. Maybe if I get REALLY brave, I'll give it a shot. Maybe not. Maybe I'll wait to hear from you, because I think it is your turn now! :)
Mind you, The Horse Whisperer is no masterpiece - it is just better than I had heard it was. I liked it.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
Les, I've been meaning to plug a movie I want you to see (if you haven't seen it). Its called Johns with Daid Arquette and Lukas Haas. It was directed by Scott silver. It should be available on video in Tulsa. Thats a big enough place. I think you'll like it.
You know what? I think Showtime and its sister channels run this one every once in a while. I'm rather sure I've seen that name pop up on my program guide before. Pretty good, eh? I'll have to check it out next time it's on.
Thanks for the suggestion!
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
I completely agree with you when it comes to Rope. I was blown away by it, and I'd already seen about half of his movies before hand.
Peace.
Rope is a great film; I'm very happy you dug it. Oddly enough, I think its critical stock has risen since I first posted this list. Perhaps one day, enough admirers will exist that I can take it off of here. Til then...
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
We've talked before about our mutual respect for 8MM, but it bears repeating: a great film, and, in my opinion, a worthy successor to Chinatown, a film it shares much in common with. I also agree on LA Story, a movie I've liked since it first came out.
Based on these two at least, I might see The Horse Whisperer, which has intrigued me in the past.
Johnny Waco
The Horse Whisperer most likely will not change anybody's life, but the critics dismissed it pretty easily, and I rather liked the film. Good stuff!
8MM is severely under-rated, especially here in the states.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
Is 8MM respected more overseas? I seem to remember a good review in Uncut, but I don't know for sure. Joel Shumacher gets a bad rap at times (a rap he has brought on himself to a large extent), but Tigerland is another film of his that doesn't get talked about a whole lot.
Johnny Waco
It seems like I remember the film popping up on end-of-year lists over in Europe, but I could be wrong.
Ol' Joel seems to swing from good to bad, and all anybody remembers is the bad (which is truly bad)...
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs