philosoraptor42 (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
philosoraptor42) wrote2009-08-10 11:31 pm
philosoraptor42) wrote2009-08-10 11:31 pm
Entry tags:
Some of the Most Underrated Movies on Rotten Tomatoes
Rotten Tomatoes has proven itself to be a remarkably reliable gauge for the quality of movies. While I may not agree with individual scores, the general gist of the scores tends to be in line with what you'd expect. However, a few favourites of mine are quite severely panned. Here they are:
The Addams Family - 57%
Consensus: The movie is peppered with amusing sight gags and one-liners, but the disjointed script doesn't cohere into a successful whole.
One of the most imaginative comedy movies of all time and yet for some odd reason nearly half the critics don't like it. Why? What seems even more bizarre is that the sequel (Addams Family Values) has a pretty reasonable score (74%). While most people I know were pleased to see a sequel that met the standards of its predecessor, I don't think anyone was saying "this is sooo much better than the first one".
Dead Man’s Shoes - 55%
Consensus: Though enhanced by cramped, gritty camerawork, this unsettling look at violence and revenge lacks the provocative edge needed to give it a substantial kick.
Now this really got to me. I thought this movie was simply amazing. Back when I discovered this movie, I was using imdb to decide my movie choices, so finding a fairly obscure movie with an 8/10 rating seemed a good sign. (The rating on imdb has since dropped to 7.9) I was really impressed with the movie. I cannot quite understand how anyone can claim that this movie lacks a 'provocative edge'. It's absolutely brutal in a strangely subtle way.
This comment in the synopsis surprised me: " An unusual film for Meadows, who has mostly plied his trade as a director of wry British comedies" I mainly know Shane Meadows for his similarly gritty "This Is England" (93%) and really cannot imagine him directing anything but gritty movies set in a depressing midlands setting. Still, if a wry comedy was what the critics were expecting then perhaps that explains the spectacularly low score?
Eagle Vs Shark - 54%
Consensus: Though there are frequent moments of wit and mordant humor, Eagle vs Shark needs more to distinguish itself from other precious, Napoleon Dynamite-ish comedies.
I have to admit that I've not seen "Napoeon Dynamite" (71%) and from what I've heard, I'm not sure I want to. I judged Eagle VS Shark purely on its own merits and it was fantastic. The way it manages to draw you into the relationship of a socially awkward and geeky couple is brilliant.
UHF - 52%
A remarkable number of the movies I'm selecting appear to be comedies. I wonder whether this is due to my having a British sense of humour or simply an odd sense of humour. Hmmm, let's see: "Meet The Parents" 84%, My Best Friend's Wedding 74%, and even Zoolander gets as high as 62%. - Yep, these critics definitely have a very different taste in comedy to myself.
UHF is basically 'Weird Al Yankovic the movie'. It contains send-ups of various movies, is generally random and absolutely hilarious. It's brilliance isn't always entirely consistent, but some moments are absolute genius. I was in stitches for the majority of the movie - and I take that as a sign of quality in a comedy.
Orange County - 47%
Consensus: Smarter than the average teen movie, but a little on the unmemorable side.
Unmemorable? It's 6 years on and I still think of this as a fantastic comedy. How's that for memorable? Not only that, but I was somewhat dissapointed with 'School Of Rock' (91%) precisely because of the way Jack Black's fantastic performance in this movie in a supporting role had raised my expectations. And of course, a cameo from 'Egon from Ghostbusters' (Harold Ramis - also director of Groundhog Day - 96%) doesn't do any harm either.
The best part of the movie is undoubtedly Mr. Burke, the illiterate English teacher. He's played by Mark White, the writer of the movie's script, and a benefit of getting the movie on DVD is the tv spots with extra material of him that isn't in the movie - such as this:
My Name Is Bruce - 41%
Consensus: My Name Is Bruce succeeds or fails based entirely upon the viewer's opinion of Bruce Campbell, an unreasonable burden for even the most accomplished actor.
I recognise that the consensus review has very little to do with the score and is more of an explanation for why critics ended up with that score. That said, I don't think this explanation is even remotely reasonable.
My Name Is Bruce is a spoof. It's subject matter is the movies of Bruce Campbell. It would be wrong to expect viewers of 'Spaceballs' to be able to get the jokes without having seen Star Wars (though admittedly it's hard to find the jokes funny in that movie, regardless of whether you've seen Star Wars or not.) Similarly "My Name Is Bruce" should not be judged as a standalone movie, but as a spoof.
Alien 3 - 34%
Yeah, I know, even the director didn't like this movie. That's no excuse for the critics though. Alien 3 has a lot more depth than the previous two installments. As well as returning us to the premise of a singular alien threat, it also brings back the impersonal Mother system by which the faceless corporation communicate. While Aliens (100%) featured a lone traitor selling out his fellow crewmates in the hopes of some big rewards from the corporation, Alien 3 seemlessly returns us to the situation in the original Alien (97%) movie where the corporation considers everyone expendable - not just soldiers.
Alien 3 also develops the comparison between carrying an alien host and being a 'mother'. This creepy imagery leads to the only decent aspect of the follow-up, Alien Resurrection (54%) - Ripley's admission that "I'm the monster's mother".
As I said before though, the editors of Rotten Tomatoes do make an effort to explain the scores the movies receive. In this case it is noted that this movie was bucking the trends of the time (as well as the expectations of the audience):
Filmed at a time when big guns and high technology dominated the screen, ALIEN 3 deserves commendation for its unique premise--battling a vicious alien creature with no weapons and almost no resources whatsoever. This scenario makes for an unusual and intriguing science fiction thriller that is also notable for Fincher's bleak industrial visuals; the film was nominated for an Oscar for Best Visual Effects.
Masters Of The Universe - 13%
Okay, so this movie is pretty naff, but even so 13% seems far too low. One thing Masters Of The Universe doesn't fail at is being entertaining. I especially love Frank Langella's performance as Skeletor. To my mind, Masters Of The Universe is the ultimate popcorn movie. Ridiculous plot with some brilliantly bizarre moments (e.g. the microwave exploding scene), engaging characters, and genuinely exciting action sequences (even if completely unbelieveable and featuring the typical stormtroopers with implausible bad aim).
This movie highlights another of the limitations of rotten tomatoes. There are only 16 reviews being used to judge this movie and no doubt all of them are long removed from the initial release of the movie when the effects were still impressive and the franchise of He-Man was still booming (and also when people still remembered how awful the cartoons of He-Man are).
And did I mention Frank Langella as Skeletor? Seriously, the guy's a genius!
The Addams Family - 57%
Consensus: The movie is peppered with amusing sight gags and one-liners, but the disjointed script doesn't cohere into a successful whole.
One of the most imaginative comedy movies of all time and yet for some odd reason nearly half the critics don't like it. Why? What seems even more bizarre is that the sequel (Addams Family Values) has a pretty reasonable score (74%). While most people I know were pleased to see a sequel that met the standards of its predecessor, I don't think anyone was saying "this is sooo much better than the first one".
Dead Man’s Shoes - 55%
Consensus: Though enhanced by cramped, gritty camerawork, this unsettling look at violence and revenge lacks the provocative edge needed to give it a substantial kick.
Now this really got to me. I thought this movie was simply amazing. Back when I discovered this movie, I was using imdb to decide my movie choices, so finding a fairly obscure movie with an 8/10 rating seemed a good sign. (The rating on imdb has since dropped to 7.9) I was really impressed with the movie. I cannot quite understand how anyone can claim that this movie lacks a 'provocative edge'. It's absolutely brutal in a strangely subtle way.
This comment in the synopsis surprised me: " An unusual film for Meadows, who has mostly plied his trade as a director of wry British comedies" I mainly know Shane Meadows for his similarly gritty "This Is England" (93%) and really cannot imagine him directing anything but gritty movies set in a depressing midlands setting. Still, if a wry comedy was what the critics were expecting then perhaps that explains the spectacularly low score?
Eagle Vs Shark - 54%
Consensus: Though there are frequent moments of wit and mordant humor, Eagle vs Shark needs more to distinguish itself from other precious, Napoleon Dynamite-ish comedies.
I have to admit that I've not seen "Napoeon Dynamite" (71%) and from what I've heard, I'm not sure I want to. I judged Eagle VS Shark purely on its own merits and it was fantastic. The way it manages to draw you into the relationship of a socially awkward and geeky couple is brilliant.
UHF - 52%
A remarkable number of the movies I'm selecting appear to be comedies. I wonder whether this is due to my having a British sense of humour or simply an odd sense of humour. Hmmm, let's see: "Meet The Parents" 84%, My Best Friend's Wedding 74%, and even Zoolander gets as high as 62%. - Yep, these critics definitely have a very different taste in comedy to myself.
UHF is basically 'Weird Al Yankovic the movie'. It contains send-ups of various movies, is generally random and absolutely hilarious. It's brilliance isn't always entirely consistent, but some moments are absolute genius. I was in stitches for the majority of the movie - and I take that as a sign of quality in a comedy.
Orange County - 47%
Consensus: Smarter than the average teen movie, but a little on the unmemorable side.
Unmemorable? It's 6 years on and I still think of this as a fantastic comedy. How's that for memorable? Not only that, but I was somewhat dissapointed with 'School Of Rock' (91%) precisely because of the way Jack Black's fantastic performance in this movie in a supporting role had raised my expectations. And of course, a cameo from 'Egon from Ghostbusters' (Harold Ramis - also director of Groundhog Day - 96%) doesn't do any harm either.
The best part of the movie is undoubtedly Mr. Burke, the illiterate English teacher. He's played by Mark White, the writer of the movie's script, and a benefit of getting the movie on DVD is the tv spots with extra material of him that isn't in the movie - such as this:
My Name Is Bruce - 41%
Consensus: My Name Is Bruce succeeds or fails based entirely upon the viewer's opinion of Bruce Campbell, an unreasonable burden for even the most accomplished actor.
I recognise that the consensus review has very little to do with the score and is more of an explanation for why critics ended up with that score. That said, I don't think this explanation is even remotely reasonable.
My Name Is Bruce is a spoof. It's subject matter is the movies of Bruce Campbell. It would be wrong to expect viewers of 'Spaceballs' to be able to get the jokes without having seen Star Wars (though admittedly it's hard to find the jokes funny in that movie, regardless of whether you've seen Star Wars or not.) Similarly "My Name Is Bruce" should not be judged as a standalone movie, but as a spoof.
Alien 3 - 34%
Yeah, I know, even the director didn't like this movie. That's no excuse for the critics though. Alien 3 has a lot more depth than the previous two installments. As well as returning us to the premise of a singular alien threat, it also brings back the impersonal Mother system by which the faceless corporation communicate. While Aliens (100%) featured a lone traitor selling out his fellow crewmates in the hopes of some big rewards from the corporation, Alien 3 seemlessly returns us to the situation in the original Alien (97%) movie where the corporation considers everyone expendable - not just soldiers.
Alien 3 also develops the comparison between carrying an alien host and being a 'mother'. This creepy imagery leads to the only decent aspect of the follow-up, Alien Resurrection (54%) - Ripley's admission that "I'm the monster's mother".
As I said before though, the editors of Rotten Tomatoes do make an effort to explain the scores the movies receive. In this case it is noted that this movie was bucking the trends of the time (as well as the expectations of the audience):
Filmed at a time when big guns and high technology dominated the screen, ALIEN 3 deserves commendation for its unique premise--battling a vicious alien creature with no weapons and almost no resources whatsoever. This scenario makes for an unusual and intriguing science fiction thriller that is also notable for Fincher's bleak industrial visuals; the film was nominated for an Oscar for Best Visual Effects.
Masters Of The Universe - 13%
Okay, so this movie is pretty naff, but even so 13% seems far too low. One thing Masters Of The Universe doesn't fail at is being entertaining. I especially love Frank Langella's performance as Skeletor. To my mind, Masters Of The Universe is the ultimate popcorn movie. Ridiculous plot with some brilliantly bizarre moments (e.g. the microwave exploding scene), engaging characters, and genuinely exciting action sequences (even if completely unbelieveable and featuring the typical stormtroopers with implausible bad aim).
This movie highlights another of the limitations of rotten tomatoes. There are only 16 reviews being used to judge this movie and no doubt all of them are long removed from the initial release of the movie when the effects were still impressive and the franchise of He-Man was still booming (and also when people still remembered how awful the cartoons of He-Man are).
And did I mention Frank Langella as Skeletor? Seriously, the guy's a genius!