A Decade of Underrated Movies

[Fletch F. Fletch]

The Onion A.V. Club has an interesting little article on the underrated movies from the last ten years. Check it out.

Some nice choices (Dark Blue, Undisputed) and some obvious ones (Office Space, Starship Troopers).

See also their Underrated List in which they give props to Kurt Russell.

[Anonymous]

This is hilarious:

Underrated guilty pleasure: The user comments and message boards at IMDB.com

Why? Why read reviews of films from people who might know what they're talking about when you can peruse uninformed, semi-literate opinions? The Internet Movie Database's user comments and message boards represent the apogee of the Internet's democratic possibilities, offering a public forum for everyone with a computer and an irresistible need to express themselves on why Father Of The Bride Part II is the finest film ever made, and/or why it demands a sequel. With their tortured logic, horrific abuse of the English language and rampant misspellings, the site's interactive areas are like the entertainment section of the world's biggest, sloppiest college newspaper.

The evidence: The commentary heralding Father Of The Bride Part II as the apex of cinematic art.

If we all weren't goofing around so much, we would've won that award.

[Hrossa]

Well, they definitely give the love to M. Night (The Village, Unbreakable), but there are some very nice surprises present: Josie & the Pussycats, Undisputed, Mr. Jealousy, The Underneath, etc.

[godardslave]

(Internet Movie Database's) user comments and message boards represent the apogee of the Internet's democratic possibilities, offering a public forum for everyone with a computer and an irresistible need to express themselves...

This statement is essentially true for 95% (pick your own percentage) of all message boards on the internet. Its not even really "democracy" but im not going into a message board culture deconstruction here.

[dvdane]

The Onion A.V. Club has an interesting little article on the underrated movies from the last ten years.

Interesting in what way?

The term "underrated" is a buzzword, mostly noting towards favorite, by taste, films of the user, instead of the film being underestimated in relation to its merits. Dark Blue underrated??? In terms of what? ...and totally moronic Josie and the Pussycats, again underrated in terms of what? Not being hailed as a masterpiece by those who thought Spice Girls the Movie was good?

More so, the writer takes a look at "...10 years in underratedness.", then picking 1 film a year, out of alone 200+ productions from Hollywood alone, and counting in Europe and Asia, we are at 1/600+ films, without any idea, except what appears to be his personal taste. What is the common underratedness one can weight Dark Blue and Brown Bunny with? Its almost like random picks.

So what is interesting by someone who says that the last 10 years are underrated, then picks 10 films out of approx 6000+ produced in those ten years?

As an end note: To suggest that IMDB is democratic is really streching the meaning of "majority rules" beyond its limits. Shit is still shit, even though 5 billion flies says its eatable.

[Polybius]

Ironic to see Birth, in light of our recent discussion of it. Sit tight, true believers...it's making a comeback.

The same may be true of Starship Troopers, which also got a rehearing around this bunch a few weeks ago. The crux of the matter there still is, and always will be, how much was Verhoven winking at the audience and how much was he endorsing the whole hideous Heinlein weltanschuung.

Some definite underappreciated gems in this group. I would point out especially Ararat, Solaris, Velvet Goldmine and Clockers.

And, yes...I liked Josie and the Pussycats, which I also took to be a droll satire disguised as a popcorn flick.

Some real junk here, though. I've always despised That Thing You Do! (vanity project for the dreadful Hanks), The Gingerbread Man (incoherent tripe and probably the worst performances on film for several really talented actors), Tin Cup (Ron Shelton's worst movie, by far. Smug and trite, evincing none of the insight and great humor of his best work), and the utterly dreadful Vanilla Sky. The less said of it, the better.

And I will go to bat for Kurt Russell (and George Roy Hill, for that matter), any place, any time.

[Fletch F. Fletch]

Ironic to see Birth, in light of our recent discussion of it. Sit tight, true believers...it's making a comeback.

Yeah, I have to say the discussion on this board about it has piqued my curiousity to check it out.

Some real junk here, though. I've always despised That Thing You Do! (vanity project for the dreadful Hanks), The Gingerbread Man (incoherent tripe and probably the worst performances on film for several really talented actors), Tin Cup (Ron Shelton's worst movie, by far. Smug and trite, evincing none of the insight and great humor of his best work), and the utterly dreadful Vanilla Sky. The less said of it, the better.

hah. Yeah, I could do without that Hanks film which seems to pop up on TV with alarming regularity. Altho, I will defend The Gingerbread Man as a neat little thriller as Altman messes with the Grisham formula for some interesting (at least IMO) results. And the less said about Tin Cup the better. I mean, these were the same guys who made the excellent Bull Durham?!

And I will go to bat for Kurt Russell (and George Roy Hill, for that matter), any place, any time.

You and me both!

[rumz]

The term "underrated" is a buzzword, mostly noting towards favorite, by taste, films of the user...

re: "buzzword," you're precisely correct, and that's why the onion's article is so valuable, because estimating a film's merits (your words) is entirely subjective, and this article is designed to generate interest in films of merit, based solely upon the criteria of those who recommend them. I don't think anyone can say, quantifiably, that "Josie and the Pussycats" is "totally moronic." You think it is--fair enough, but the point is that the word underrated is used to prompt you to re-evaluate your own response to a film if you didn't like it the first time. That's the whole point, unless you're in the Kael school of criticism, which I fundamentally disagree with.

[dvdane]

...but the point is that the word underrated is used to prompt you to re-evaluate your own response to a film if you didn't like it the first time.

That is correct. Any film will have a value which sum is the base of various factors (personal taste, critical acclaim, historical context, etc) and the idea of a film being "rated" is to give it a sum which for you sums up the value of the film. Hence, overrated will suggest, that the value of the film in reality is lower than a given standard, and the other way around, underrated, that the value of the film in reality is higher than the given standard. As such, the word alone will, as you say, promt the reader to first step of a re-evaluation.

But, and this is an important but, using the word alone does not warrant a change in value. That is why is say that "underrated" has become a buzzword, i.e. a word used by someone who wants to sound important, just like mise-en-scene, auteur and spacial composition.

For me, in order to present a film as underrated, its current value has to be challenged by a new approach, that will change the value of the film in a positive way. And one sentence does not even come close hinting at a new approach.

A film like "Starship Troopers" has been exposed alot critically, both because of its auterist connection by Verhoeven and because of the differences between the film and the book by Heinlein, but especially after a certain French director called it (and "Showgirls") best American films of the year. It's value is pretty much balanced out, and there really has to come something heavier than one hell of a claim, "...Among the most subversive and widely misunderstood studio films ever produced...", that never is backed up, to push it out of balance.

While everyone can say that a film is underrated, there has to be some support of ones claim. Otherwise its just IMDB and YMDB over again.

If merely promting the readers minds by taking films at random, the films picked share nothing in common than the writers opion of quality, and say that they are underrated and then suggest that because of that its a decade of underratedness is a valuable article, then the bar has been lowered to below YMDB standard.

Then again, they call Mike D'Angelo a critic.

[analoguezombie]

Well, they definitely give the love to M. Night (The Village, Unbreakable), but there are some very nice surprises present: Josie & the Pussycats, Undisputed, Mr. Jealousy, The Underneath, etc.

I aboslutely give it up for Josie and the Pussycats. You go into it, if you can even convince yourself to watch it, thinking it'll be a fluff preteen movie about an all-girl fun band, and what you get is a scathing critique on the current state of manufactured pop music and the cultural machine that sells it. a+

[souvenir]

Great to see a mention for Summer of Sam in there too.

Another underrated Kurt Russell performance not mentioned is Breakdown, which leads me to wonder what happened to Jonathan Mostow's creativity? A quick look at Imdb shows that he has another Terminator movie, some superhero Will Smith thing, a remake of the great Frankenheimer film Seconds, and *gasp* Swiss Family Robinson in the pipeline. I was hoping he would write/direct more of the little B-movie stuff like Breakdown, but apparently not.

[Polybius]

Altho, I will defend The Gingerbread Man as a neat little thriller as Altman messes with the Grisham formula for some interesting (at least IMO) results.

I only saw it once, and that was a while ago. I may have to give it another look.

As far as the term "Underrated" goes, my take is fairly simple. Most of us read and talk a lot about film. We have a view of the cinematic zeitgeist, subjective though it may be. Within that framework, some films that we think are good, or important, (or both), are probably not going to rise to that level among other moviegoers (even if you limit it to the ones whose opinions you really respect) and among the critical consensus. There will always be ones you find more merit to than they seem, at least to you, to be accorded.

Of course the same thing works in the oppositie direction. So that when I see Magnolia, which I despised on nearly every level (and I mean actively loathed and wanted to scream at the people involved...) hearlded with huge accolades, far and wide, well beyond the usual suspects who like anyhing they're told to by Boxofficemojo or Roger Ebert...I'm sorry, but "Overrated" is the term that will fit all of those bills, perfectly.

I'll happily admit it's all subjective, but it's very valid, nonetheless.

[zedz]

While there's always going to be a subjective aspect to what films we declare "overrated" or "underrated", it's possible to be more objective when estblishing the "rating" that you're measuring it against.

Following on from Polybius' example, it's very unlikely that, given the critical reception to it, anybody would argue that Magnolia was underrated. Or Citizen Kane, or 8 1/2. There is such a thing as critical consensus (though if a film gets called 'underrated' too often, that consensus may well shift), and that's the yardstick by which under- and over-rating are measured.

A list such as the Onion's will never amount to more than a personal "I think these films are worth a reappraisal," but I personally find that far more useful than yet another "Greatest Films of All Time" lists featuring the usual suspects.

[Jun-Dai]

Office Space was underrated? I may be biased because I didn't like the film, but isn't it something of a cult favorite? I run into it everywhere in life (probably doesn't help that I inhabit a cubicle in a financial institution) and on the Internet, touted as one of the funniest and most chillingly accurate films of recent years. My coworker bought a red Swingline stapler as an homage, and he mentioned that when he ordered it, he learned that Swingline had never made red staplers like the one in the film, but had started producing them simply because there was so much demand. Another of my coworkers also bought a red Swingline stapler without knowing that another had done the same. Just look here.

It seems to me that it would be hard for such a popular and praised film to be underrated, not that I really believe in such a concept.

[The Fanciful Norwegian]

Yeah, they sort of mention that in the article. They try to claim it's underrated because it didn't do so well on its initial theatrical release, which doesn't really qualify it as "underrated" IMO since it gained a huge following on video. Maybe it was underrated for a short while, but today? No way.

[David Ehrenstein]

I'd say Altman' s The Company and Joe Dante's Looney Tunes Back in Action are highly underrated.

[Polybius]

There is such a thing as critical consensus (though if a film gets called 'underrated' too often, that consensus may well shift)

I've seen The Outlaw Josey Wales (full disclosure: I despise that film, and I usually like Eastwood's films, his westerns in particular) listed as "underrated" so often, I think it might have rocketed directly from "underrated" to "overrated" with only the briefest stop at "appreciated correctly."

[miloauckerman]

I didn't realize that the Snipes-Rhames boxing movie was by Walter Hill. I'll have to check it out now, I lumped it into the DMX-Steven Seagal class of prison movie on sight.

The Village deserves all the disdain heaped upon it, but it did have moments (the blind girl wandering through the forest). It would have been M. Night's most watchable movie by a large margin had the 'twist' not been so unbearably stupid.

I'm not as big on Josie and the Pussycats as I would expect (love late-90s/early-00s teen comedies), I think it may be a bit too plastic, the satire a bit too direct for my tastes. But it also has Rachael Leigh Cook and Rosario Dawson in punky-cat costumes, so maybe it is the greatest movie ever.

Bully is underrated, as is Kids, simply because most critics and viewers judged it on content and their view of Clarke as a creepy paedo pornographer. Love both, think they're brilliant (Bully makes me feel filthier than any film that comes to mind), think even those who sing their praises (Ebert) do so for wrong-headed reasons ('movie every parent should see to find out what kids are doing...').


Is Dead Man underrated? Is Jarmusch ever underrated? Based on the last two, I'd say severely overrated.

[Polybius]

But it also has Rachael Leigh Cook and Rosario Dawson in punky-cat costumes, so maybe it is the greatest movie ever.

Indeed. I had trepidation about seeing it in a theatre for fear of a Paul Reubens-type episode.

Bully is underrated, as is Kids, simply because most critics and viewers judged it on content and their view of Clarke as a creepy paedo pornographer. Love both, think they're brilliant (Bully makes me feel filthier than any film that comes to mind), think even those who sing their praises (Ebert) do so for wrong-headed reasons ('movie every parent should see to find out what kids are doing...')

Weird thing: I love Bully and find it wholly engrossing but I really can't stand Kids. There is no rational explaination, even my tremendous dislike of Leo Fitzpatrick (who is, after all, in Bully as well and has a smallish recurring role in my current favorite drama series, HBO's The Wire.)

Just one of those quirks.

[Andre Jurieu]

I didn't realize that the Snipes-Rhames boxing movie was by Walter Hill. I'll have to check it out now, I lumped it into the DMX-Steven Seagal class of prison movie on sight.

I do believe Undisputed is one of Armond White's favorites.

Undisputed
Walter Hill's neo-prison/neo-fight film pits two boxers (Ving Rhames and Wesley Snipes) and imagines the interior life of macho-obsessed men. It's a mythic battle royale. The b-movie style hides an existential punch inside an Everlast glove. Rhames and Snipes were never better.

... a recent film like Walter Hill's probing, politically conscious boxing movie Undisputed.

Bully is underrated, as is Kids, simply because most critics and viewers judged it on content...

Excuse my dumb question, but even though I thought Kids was great, I have to ask it. Why it wrong to judge the merits of a film on its content? How else are we supposed to judge it?

[lord_clyde]

Excuse my dumb question, but even though I thought Kids was great, I have to ask it. Why it wrong to judge the merits of a film on its content? How else are we supposed to judge it?

You know what they say, there are no stupid questions. To judge a flick negatively just because it contains violence or sexual situations is an instance of judging solely on content.

To elaborate, to say a Clockwork Orange is trash because of its content while not trying to understand the point of a group of punks looting raping and killing is shallow criticism; I suppose it is equally bad to say that Showgirls is a great film because of all the nudity.

I never judge a movie for its content, rather I seek to understand the motivations of the characters and the artists intentions. If it works, great. If not, it's excess.

[David Ehrenstein]

I never judge a movie for its content, rather I seek to understand the motivations of the characters and the artists intentions.

Well everything you've just listed is content. As for the artist's "intentions"
I always turn to the opening line of The Wild Bunch: "I know what you meant to do, it's what you did that I don't like!"

[shirobamba]

If we all weren't goofing around so much, we would've won that award.

Yes, we´re badly underrated

[shirobamba]

If we all weren't goofing around so much, we would've won that award.

Yes, we´re badly underrated

There´s a very amusing article in Cinema Scope concerning under- or overrating a filmmakers work: in this case Uchida, Tomo

[Andre Jurieu]

To judge a flick negatively just because it contains violence or sexual situations is an instance of judging solely on content.

That's just knee-jerk reactions. That seems to be an example of judging a work solely on the surface of its content.

To elaborate, to say a Clockwork Orange is trash because of its content while not trying to understand the point of a group of punks looting raping and killing is shallow criticism

Yeah, but how is anyone supposed to understand the point of a group of punks looting, raping, and killing if the artist doesn't actually place something in the content of the film to allow us to understand. Kubrick deliberately created Clockwork in a very specific way to make sure we understand his overall point. In my mind that's the "contents" of a film.

I never judge a movie for its content, rather I seek to understand the motivations of the characters and the artists intentions.

Yeah, I'm fairly certain we all do, but understanding motivations of the characters and the artist's intentions is a function of the film's contents. We don't make excuses for a character's behavior or an artist's intensions based on something we just make up for ourselves, separate from the film's contents (at least I hope we don't) just so we can say we enjoy a film that we actually have no reason to enjoy. These interpretations are all drawn from the contents of a film, aren't they? I can't say Alex is an asshole in Clockwork because he lost his kitten when he was 6, because it's not part of the film's contents, or implied in the films contents. I'm assuming we aren't judging films based on its marketing strategy, scandals the stars of the film are involved with, and on-set production anecdotes, because that stuff seems to be examples of stuff that are not within the scope of a film's contents?