Which films have received the biggest reappraisal since release?

2

Comments

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 5,593
    Leon12 wrote: »
    QoS seems to have gone through a major re-appraisal with many now saying it is a cracking Bond film, I think it's great, it's stripped down action, with a Bond overcome with rage and grief and is shown as a borderline alcoholic

    I’d say that QOS going up in estimation really only applies to Bond fans. I don’t think it’s getting any re-appraisal among wider critics and movie watching public

    Can you name any films that got any sort of re-appraisal among wider critics and movie watching public? These are all one-and-done people. All of the films I can think of that have gone through some sort of renaissance (QoS, OHMSS, Revenge of the Sith / the SW Prequels at large, etc) are only experiencing that renaissance with fans of those respective franchises.
  • Posts: 10,816
    Just wanted to pop in to echo the Connery in TB praise - the downright coolest Bond performance and film undoubtedly. His first four films + performances are downright legendary. Definitely seems to me OHMSS has gone way up over time, the two Dalton films to an extent, and QOS among many Bond fans.
  • DraxCucumberSandwichDraxCucumberSandwich United Kingdom
    edited November 2021 Posts: 200
    Can you name any films that got any sort of re-appraisal among wider critics and movie watching public? These are all one-and-done people. All of the films I can think of that have gone through some sort of renaissance (QoS, OHMSS, Revenge of the Sith / the SW Prequels at large, etc) are only experiencing that renaissance with fans of those respective franchises.

    That’s a fair point, although I think OHMSS has gained in reputation among film critics as well as fans.

    There are a select few movies that have had their reputations turned around and gained recognition among film critics long after their release, but it’s true they are few in number.

    OHMSS is one, and off the top of my head I can think of Vertigo (Hitchcock), Days of Heaven (Malik) and A.I (Spielberg)

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 5,593
    That’s fair enough, and I didn’t know those last three films experienced a reappraisal.
  • There are a select few movies that have had their reputations turned around and gained recognition among film critics long after their release, but it’s true they are few in number.

    I always think of Apocalypse Now as a good example of a film that's grown in reputation. But there aren't that many. Perhaps The Wicker Man would be another example?

  • DraxCucumberSandwichDraxCucumberSandwich United Kingdom
    Posts: 200
    That’s fair enough, and I didn’t know those last three films experienced a reappraisal.

    Another one would be Peeping Tom (Michael Powell)

    What stands out I guess among these films is that they are all by major film makers whose work is studied, and so they are ripe for being looked at afresh.

    Peter Hunt, with all due respect, isn’t really a major film maker but OHMSS is part of THE major movie franchise so again it was in a good place for its qualities to eventually be recognised.
  • DraxCucumberSandwichDraxCucumberSandwich United Kingdom
    edited November 2021 Posts: 200

    I always think of Apocalypse Now as a good example of a film that's grown in reputation. But there aren't that many. Perhaps The Wicker Man would be another example?

    Apocalypse Now probably yes, I think it’s reputation has grown. The Wicker Man also but I believe that was pretty well received at the time, it’s just that it was as an obscure and niche horror movie and so not widely known

    Another one would be Blade Runner
  • I think QOS going up in appraisal applies only to forums like this.To many mainstream critics and the general public,it’s still considered one of the worst along with DAD.
  • Posts: 474
    I guess Apocalypse Now makes Connery feel better about his weight gain in Diamonds Are Forever. At least they didnt need to darken the whole room and just have a portion of his face in the light to hide his body.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 600
    The horror...the horror...
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    Posts: 12,409
    Absolutely OHMSS, totally viewed differently now and past several years. But upon release, nope.

    That is the most outstanding one. Another might be DAD; a huge global hit.
  • DragonpolDragonpol Writer @ http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 15,081
    M16_Cart wrote: »
    I guess Apocalypse Now makes Connery feel better about his weight gain in Diamonds Are Forever. At least they didnt need to darken the whole room and just have a portion of his face in the light to hide his body.

    Or make him wear an adult nappy, as Marlon Brando did in later life. Sometimes it's best if Bond dies early. ;)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython Alpha Quadrant
    Posts: 5,520
    QOS seems to be getting appraisal for from fans the same way LTK was years back. But only among fans.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    Posts: 12,409
    Yes, pretty much, @MakeshiftPython. For general public reappraisal, I still go with OHMSS and perhaps ONLY that one.
  • DragonpolDragonpol Writer @ http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 15,081
    QOS seems to be getting appraisal for from fans the same way LTK was years back. But only among fans.

    Only among the people really in the know, you could say. I suppose the fans are the only people who really care about the character all year round. James Bond fandom isn't just for Christmas. ;)
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    edited November 2021 Posts: 2,239
    Leon12 wrote: »
    QoS seems to have gone through a major re-appraisal with many now saying it is a cracking Bond film, I think it's great, it's stripped down action, with a Bond overcome with rage and grief and is shown as a borderline alcoholic

    I’d say that QOS going up in estimation really only applies to Bond fans. I don’t think it’s getting any re-appraisal among wider critics and movie watching public

    Can you name any films that got any sort of re-appraisal among wider critics and movie watching public? These are all one-and-done people. All of the films I can think of that have gone through some sort of renaissance (QoS, OHMSS, Revenge of the Sith / the SW Prequels at large, etc) are only experiencing that renaissance with fans of those respective franchises.

    Agreed. Probably not. The general audience doesn't care enough to do reappraisals. The only exception is perhaps OHMSS, due to a general re-evaluation amongst movie critics, and several high profile film industry people singling it out as an inspiration, and it is referenced in NTTD. And that in turn might cause some general audience members who care enough to do a full Bondathon to rate it higher. It's pretty common in the top 5 on Bond forums, top 10 in other lists. If someone doesn't like it, it's usually because Lazenby.

    Other films like TLD, OP, QOS are only more popular amongst Bond fans
  • Posts: 474
    The general audience may not be rewatching Dalton or Moore, but they might rewatch Craig. Craig has an appeal to wider audiences beyond just Bond fans.

    Every so often in the Bond role, there's a landmark actor that's culturally significant that redefines the role. In the 60's that was Connery. And the 2nd one is Craig.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 2,200
    Not a movie, but a person and their TV show: Bob Ross and The Joy of Painting. The internet immortalized them both. They are never boring. They are both missed. Bob Ross makes everyone feel better.
  • Posts: 206
    I think the hardcore Bond fans are the ones who reappraise certain films the most.

    Among Bond fans, I'd say OHMSS, OP, TLD, LTK, QOS.

    Among the general audience, I'm not entirely sure because I can't ever see them watching a Bond film multiple times. Maybe films like GE, CR, SF. But going through all 25 more than once?
  • DraxCucumberSandwichDraxCucumberSandwich United Kingdom
    Posts: 200
    I find general audiences have their preferences just as much if not more so than fans, and aren’t much interested in moving beyond that.

    My in-laws for instance will always watch a Connery movie if it’s on TV. They have no interest in Craig after their initial viewing. My wife gravitates towards Brosnan, although I do get her to watch others as well
  • Posts: 474
    I think OHMSS has somewhat of a following among non-hardcore Bond fans too. But that's because it's seen as a classic earlier Bond film in the 60's that influenced later films.

    But it'll be harder for later underrated films OP/TLD/LTK/QOS to have that same impact as a film that came out in the first decade of the fledgling series.
  • DraxCucumberSandwichDraxCucumberSandwich United Kingdom
    Posts: 200
    M16_Cart wrote: »
    I think OHMSS has somewhat of a following among non-hardcore Bond fans too. But that's because it's seen as a classic earlier Bond film in the 60's that influenced later films.

    But it'll be harder for later underrated films OP/TLD/LTK/QOS to have that same impact as a film that came out in the first decade of the fledgling series.

    OHMSS was a departure at the time in that it had a new Bond and also elements that audiences hadn’t seen before in the romance, the tragedy and the vulnerability of Bond. But despite that it was still recognisably a Bond film with all the hooks that audiences associate with Bond. Amazing action; fun, humour and one liners (Lazenby did his best); glamorous locations and glorious on-location shooting; a wonderful John Barry score; beautiful girls; a classic and well known villain; stellar production values. So it’s undoubtedly Bond, but with more humanity and emotion that we now see as elevating the movie above others. It doesn’t take away any of the Bondian elements that everyone loves but adds more depth.

    LTK and QOS are going to have a harder time gaining wider recognition as they are departures in a different sense. They arguably strip out some of the cinematic Bondian elements that people widely recognise and they are about revenge and dealing with trauma which is something that some people are never going to want to watch a Bond movie for.

    Also, whereas OHMSS is totally unique and it’s own thing, there will probably be a lingering perception (fairly or not) that LTK is Bond doing 80s Lethal Weapon/Miami Vice, and QOS is Bond doing 00s Bourne shaky-cam. They’re both great films - LTK is a highlight of the franchise for me - but I can’t see them ever coming out from the corner they are in.

    If you have casual movie fans over and suggest putting on a Bond movie, not many non-fans would say ‘let’s watch QOS’. I can’t ever see that happening.

    Octopussy on the other hand….
    Get the drinks out and settle into a camp classic
  • Iv never thought that LTK was badly received.It got good reviews at the time ( It was a tad controversial because of its violence ) and only underperformed in America but got good box office everywhere else.Die hard Bond fans have always loved it ( Just as Dalton himself has always been appreciated by the core fan base )
  • Posts: 2,366
    Not that I was around in the 60s, but it seems Thunderball was quite highly praised back in the day.

    The New York Times even listed Thunderball among the best films of the year. I don't think any other Bond film has enjoyed that honor.

    It's worth poining out that OHMSS got generally good reviews when it premiered--many critics who weren't keen on Lazenby praised the film nevertheless. But after Connery returned and Moore debuted OHMSS came to be regarded as a one-off with a failed Bond and as a result received fewer screenings and TV airings.
  • edited November 2021 Posts: 48
    I’ve seen more positive commentary surrounding Moonraker these days than ever in the last 30 years (i.e. since I’ve been old enough to pay attention). Which is a nice change, since I’ve always adored it.

    Also, I’ve seen more folks calling out TWINE as “not as bad as I remember / people say it is,” after years of people lumping it in with DAD. At release, I recall the overriding reaction being “eh”. The improvement is cool to see, since I appreciate TWINE a lot more now in light of the direction of the Craig era.
  • Junglist_1985Junglist_1985 Los Angeles
    Posts: 479
    Moonraker works best when you approach from “fantasy Bond” category… it really is a world apart. A rather fun one at that…

    Still, I do contend that the first hour-ish is actually top tier Bond…. The skydive, G force simulation incident, snooping around Venice, Corrine’s death, arrival to Rio, Carnival — all some of my favorite moments in the franchise (and that’s coming from someone who’s really not a Moore fan)
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 354
    Geno wrote: »
    Also, I’ve seen more folks calling out TWINE as “not as bad as I remember / people say it is,” after years of people lumping it in with DAD. At release, I recall the overriding reaction being “eh”. The improvement is cool to see, since I appreciate TWINE a lot more now in light of the direction of the Craig era.

    There are the seeds of a great Bond movie with TWINE. Regardless of their shortcomings as writers, Purvis & Wade were able to put together here a plot that had all the Fleming-esque beats without being derivative, with some unexpected variations (M getting kidnapped, Zukovsky returning). Elektra is a great character and Sophie Marceau gives it all in her performance. The first hour is quite impressive.
    What doesn't work however is very glaring. Christmas Jones is a terrible character, almost a caricature of previous Bond girls, and hiring Denise Richards made her even more ridiculous. The direction lacks energy. And the whole idea behind the Renard character, the not feeling pain stuff, works much better in theory than in execution. As soon as Elektra is dead, it's obvious that Renard is just a glorified henchman with a particularity rather than the doomed figure the script wants to make us assume he is. Bond killing him is no climax at all.
  • Posts: 48
    As soon as Elektra is dead, it's obvious that Renard is just a glorified henchman with a particularity rather than the doomed figure the script wants to make us assume he is. Bond killing him is no climax at all.

    Agreed, this is actually my biggest issue with the movie. I can imagine a much cooler ending if Renard is dispatched first, then we build up to Elektra with a more dramatic and difficult confrontation. As it stands, once Elektra’s gone, the remainder of the film fizzles out.
  • FeyadorFeyador Montreal, Canada
    edited December 2021 Posts: 341
    Revelator wrote: »
    Not that I was around in the 60s, but it seems Thunderball was quite highly praised back in the day.

    The New York Times even listed Thunderball among the best films of the year. I don't think any other Bond film has enjoyed that honor.

    It's worth poining out that OHMSS got generally good reviews when it premiered--many critics who weren't keen on Lazenby praised the film nevertheless. But after Connery returned and Moore debuted OHMSS came to be regarded as a one-off with a failed Bond and as a result received fewer screenings and TV airings.

    Indeed! Pauline Kael in The New Yorker gave OHMSS a favorable review in '69 but complained that Tracy had been killed off needlessly (they didn't care much about "spoilers" in those days) because, well ... a wife like Norah Charles never got in the way of her husband Nick in the Thin Man series! Which is a comment I love and have always remembered for some reason.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 719
    I 100% agree to a commenter here who compared OHMSS to Vertigo: Both underwent a huge reappraisal both in the Bond community but also the general one of movie fans. To me it's THE Bond film that (like Vertigo within the Hitchcock legacy) not only got a reappraisal but today tops many fans' ranking.

    I myself re-discovered it through Daniel Craig's take of the character - before it was just Connery's first 4 and "the others" (which I liked all - some more, some less).

    Also agree to QoS: Within the Bond community I am pretty sure it re-claimed a lot of appreciation (myself included) and will keep doing so. Don't expect it to become a late hit like OHMSS did - but I am sure it will climb up the rankings over the time to come.

    About TB: I never got why somebody dislikes it, honestly. My TOP 2 have been and always will be GF and followed by TB (trailed by CR, QoS, FRWL, DN, SF, NTTD, LALD). I could only quote others here agreeing to the total badass coolness of Connery in this movie ... and I love the locations, the sets, the dialogue, the characters ... just awesome. And - yes - also the underwater action. I was truly surprised to learn anybody would not have GF and TB at very least in their Top 10 list! But that's so great about Bond: There's something in the legacy of films here to anybody's taste.
Sign In or Register to comment.