Comments on: Critical Reassessment: ‘Heaven’s Gate’ And 11 More Films That Have Been Reconsidered Over Time

By: BrianZ

BrianZ — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:59 +0000

Nice article. My only qualm, and I apologize for being one of those guys, but who is defending the Coens' Ladykillers?

By: Ricky

Ricky — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:59 +0000

I'd also include David Lynch's Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me to this list. It was booed when it premiered at Cannes in 1992 and was brutally received by the critics ("It isn't the worst movie ever made; it just seems to be" -Vincent Canby) later that year and was a box office bomb, but it seems like it's been reappraised over time and now seems much, much more highly-regarded, and is now analyzed and discussed as a very relevant entry in Lynch's filmography.

Also, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, which I think most seem to agree now that, George Lazenby aside (who again, isn't as terrible as most initially felt he was post-Sean Connery), is actually one of the best Bond films in the series and really laid the groundwork for the more emotional, sensitive, character-driven angle that the more recent Daniel Craig films have taken.

By: JJansen

JJansen — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:59 +0000

"Friedkin reportedly removed a subplot that made Scheider's character look more sympathetic"

I have done some research into this comment. This is urban legend and false. The statement is a mis-quote from the book HURRICANE BILLY about the script for SORCERER. Walon Green's screenplay contains no subplot featuring a small boy in the village. This may have been discussed, but there is no evidence of script pages or any footage to cut out of the film to upset Scheider. The novelization of the script/film also does not contain any additional scenes with this subplot idea.

The bio book on Scheider STILL WATERS uses this false information and it is also included on the Wiki page. If you can find any evidence at all…please do so. If not, there is no reason to keep this "issue" alive in relation to SORCERER. (A great film in 1977 and still today)

By: JJansen

JJansen — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:59 +0000

"Friedkin reportedly removed a subplot that made Scheider's character look more sympathetic"

By: JJansen

JJansen — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:59 +0000

"Friedkin reportedly removed a subplot that made Scheider's character look more sympathetic"

By: Wes

Wes — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:59 +0000

Boo: Bringing Up Baby and The Game!
Yea: Ladykillers and Crash!

By: Harley Quinn

Harley Quinn — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:59 +0000

Cleopatra isn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be and I'm sick of people harping on about it. Is it great? No. But is it the worst movie ever? Certainly not. If they had made it into 2 movies, as originally planned, it would've been a lot better.

By: Ken

Ken — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:59 +0000

Eyes Wide Shut is STARTING to get re-evaluated? It's fucking brilliant. I'm pretty sure it was one of Scorsese's top 10 films of the 1990s too.

By: Alex

Alex — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

Marie Antoinette. Sofia Coppola's Warhol-esque dissection of celebrity is brilliant, and it's only getting better with time. Firstly, the meticulous art direction couldn't be better, but then there's also Kirsten Dunst, who really gets deep into the psyche of a character we all hate and even makes us sympathetic towards her. Coppola's anachronistic musical choices are amazing as usual (Gang of Four! The Strokes!), and her direction shines as well–this is a really beautiful movie. Marie Antoinette is a culturally important with film that is a testament to the lasting obsession with celebrity and its emptiness that absolutely deserves a critical reevaluation.

By: daniel

daniel — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

Catch-22 is another i'd throw on this list; finally folks are starting to see how great that picture was. I saw it before reading the book, and while the book is equally amazing, i have to say, the movie means yet more to me. Funereal slapstick, that movie. Genius.

By: TheoC

TheoC — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

I really hope Argo is reassessed to "fancy TV movie of the week". Lebowski came out pretty flat, and somewhat divisive though you wouldn't think that now.

John Carter will go the TRON route and have a pointless sequel in 30 years with the late Taylor Kitsch's head CG'ed, it will still be fucking stupid.

This is a really good list, though I'm not buying Zardoz, I've always loved Cronenberg's Crash despite how often you have to explain it's not the Paul Haggis movie.

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

glad to see one of my all time favorites, Zardoz, pop up in the honorable mentions. I think recent critical opinion places that film awkwardly somewhere between the "undeservedly panned masterpiece" and the "so bad it's good" categories, which is probably about where it belongs – it's as brilliant as it is ridiculous, and a rare example of a film that comes off better today not in spite of, but rather BECAUSE of how poorly it's aged. in both the outdatedness of its style and the pointedness of its theme it serves a bizarre death knell to the hippie age.

By: thedude

thedude — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

"but if you look at the 5-Star reviews on Amazon for the recent 3-disc set (featuring a five hour and twenty minute cut!!"

Where are you seeing this. I can only find the usual 251 min. version????

By: OWEN

OWEN — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

One I was sure was bound to appear, at least between the "Honorary Mentions", is Peeping Tom, a movie that basically destroyed Michael Powell career and resurfaced thanks to the championing of Martin Scorsese. There's a great entry about it in Roger Ebert's "Great Movies" (wich more or less seals the deal concerning the critical reevaluation of a film). Link! http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19990502/REVIEWS08/905020301/1023
(By the way, I thnk Ebert is wrong when he says people rejected this movie and embraced Psycho because the macabre was expected from Hitchcock, but because Hitchcock always made clear that was all in jest, and always gave his audience escape points from all the grimness – being the humor or the characters you're clearly meant to identify with – while people rejected this movie because, as Ebert certainly notes, made them feel part of the stoking and eventual murdering of the victims. It's all about the perverse pleasures of watching in the dark, you know? Curiously this also could be considered the reason "Frenzy", a later movie in Hitch career, was one of his few flops)

By: Baley

Baley — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

Wages of Fear is by no stretch of the imagination a film noir.

By: vortex

vortex — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

I'd add "Near Dark."

By: Toby

Toby — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

The Fountain, Bringing Out the Dead, Popeye and Speedracer for starters.

By: TommyT

TommyT — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

I'm surprised not to see Terry Gilliam's Brazil in your list when you included Fear & Loathing. The battle that Gilliam had with Sid Sheinberg & Universal is legendary.

By: walking on coal

walking on coal — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

It's only the latest sign of the rehabilitation of Michael Cimino's epic Western that famously brought down its studio, virtually ended the director's career, and became so synonymous with disaster that Kevin Costner's "Waterworld" was nicknamed "Kevin's Gate" by wags when it seemed that it too was headed for failure.

http://www.sdfirewalk.com/

By: Michael O'Farrell

Michael O'Farrell — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

To the Playlist staff: It's not true that Charles Laughton disliked his child actors in "The Night Of The Hunter. Disc # 2 of Criterion's superb presentation of the film features a 2 1/2 hour documentary consisting mainly of footage that didn't make it into the final release version : what ended up on the cutting room floor. The presentation is entitled "Charles Laughton Directs" and that is exactly what is shown :Laughton directing his actors, with numerous segments showing his brilliant handling of his child actors, who he treats sternly but really with great support and loving guidance. The fact that the movie was ignored by the studio was criminal. One of America's greatest movies went almost completely unnoticed back in 1955, and sadly Laughton, discouraged by the then poor critical and box office reception, never directed another film. The man was a genius.

By: sanjuro

sanjuro — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

Drinking Buddies, Safety Not Guaranteed, very poor independent movies, badly written, uninteresting, with directing hardly better than TV sitcoms, that receive praise from lousy critics. Hopefully they will be reassessed and severely downgraded as they deserve in a near future. There are some much better independent movies out there.

By: Kim

Kim — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

Steven Spielberg's Hook! The leads play with such joy, the production design, albeit a little tacky, is definitely creative, the visual effects still hold up, John Williams contributes some of his very best work to the score and most importantly: every single child actor in this picture actually does a brilliant job! And I didn't even mention Rufio yet…

By: Kim

Kim — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:58:58 +0000

In addition to Hook. I think Duck, You Sucker! by Sergio Leone should be heralded as a straight classic. Other films that did not receive the recognition I believe they totally deserve are: Life (yes, the Ted Demme film with Eddie Murphy and Martin Lawrence), *batteries not included, Sphere, Clockers, The Hudsucker Proxy and One Eight Seven.