Slumdog Millionaire
Not a bad film by any means, but it got a lot of hype in Britain particularly (I see not really in the US). I think a lot of it was because it was refreshing in that year to have a film not take itself too seriously IIRC, and it was a nice UK - India joint venture.
Well, it won eight Academy Awards including Best Picture and Best Director. It also took in $140 million at the box office in North America, so I think it’s still pretty highly regarded.
Yeah, I forgot the actual content of the OP. I thought it was films that have had a fall from grace. Which Slumdog has, in my opinion. 8 oscars, and who would put it among their favourite films now?
But the OP was films that got “mixed to positive reviews” and are now actively disliked. Which doesn’t apply to SM.
Then again… 8 Oscars is a pretty positive review. 
Regardless, I agree with SM being labeled a film that was perhaps a little bit more hype than substance.
I still don’t get the impression that people dislike Slumdog Millionaire now. Maybe lots of people do and I just haven’t picked up on it.
I know, I’m saying it neither got “mixed to positive reviews”, nor is now actively disliked. So it was a double d’oh
I think everyone liked the Transformers movie when it was released and it made a ton of money at the box office. Nowdays any mention of either Michael Bay or Shia LeBeouf elicits nothing but groans and begging for mercy.
Because Slumdog Millionaire won so many Oscars, it fell victim to “…Wuz Robbed!” syndrome. EVERYONE loved The Dark Knight and the fact that it wasn’t even nominated pushed that fact over every other movie that was nominated and/or won that year. In 25 years, people will talk about the two the way Forrest Gump/Pulp Fiction are talked about today. No one HATES Forrest Gump (quiet, no one does), but I think everyone agrees “Pulp Fiction Wuz Robbed!”
The first Transformers movie actually wasn’t half bad. But the sequels (which are truly as awful as advertised) have forever tainted it.
It was about half bad, but there was definitely some awful and quite a bit of unbearable mixed in as well. I did like that bullets/shells/missiles did actual damage to the … Decepticons? (Am I remembering that right?) Usually invading demigods are somehow impervious to those things.
Who is this “everyone” who liked Transformers? And just for the record, I’ve hated on Shia LaBeouf ever since The Battle of Shaker Heights. He. Can. Not. Act.
Stranger
Stranger on a Train:
I thought he was good in “Holes.”
IMDb audience being mostly American, I think it is massively biased towards American cinema. European films are under represented and Asian movies virtually absent. On top of this, I think that recent movies are vastly over represented too, especially blockbusters.
Not a good reference IMO. You write “hardcore film lovers”, I’d say “Young American movie goers without much knowledge of international and classical cinema”.
“The dark knight” number 6? WTF? All three LotR films in the Top 20? Really? Exactly two Asian movies in the top 100, one being “Princess Mononoke”, anyone? Best French movie is “Amelie”? Seriously?
I hadn’t looked at the IMDb top list in years and years, when IMDb first came out I think it was more of a film enthusiast website than the popular culture fan base it has now. Back then the top list on IMDb was basically a very good approximation of some of the best American classic films, and almost all of the top 20 were not from the recent 4-5 years period. It was still weighted heavily to American cinema, but it is an English language website. But yeah, I was shocked at how much that list has changed since then, it was almost like the AFI Top 100 at one point now it’s littered with mediocre films from recent history.
Sometimes they start powering down the hype machine even earlier – I’ve seen a lot less promotion of the Star Trek: Into Dumbness video release than I’d normally expect.
clairobscur writes:
> I’d say “Young American movie goers without much knowledge of international
> and classical cinema”.
It’s not typical American filmgoers at all though. Casual filmgoers don’t vote on the IMDb or at least their votes aren’t counted because it’s necessary to be a very regular voter to have your vote counted in the Top 250 list. It really is almost necessary to see several dozen films each year to be able to vote regularly and thus to have your vote counted. I’d say “(mostly) young(ish) American filmgoers who see lots of current American films each year but who (mostly) haven’t seen many older films or non-American films.” If it were a poll among casual American filmgoers, recent American blockbusters would be much higher on the list.
After spending all year being cagey about Benedict Cumberbatch’s identity, the first line on the back of the video box is…
Kirk battles the deranged genius Khan…