# Stuff everybody used to hate (and now love) **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 23, 2010, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stuff-everybody-used-to-hate-and-now-love/547720 "2010-07-23T15:16:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2010, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stuff-everybody-used-to-hate-and-now-love/547720/81 "2010-07-31T01:38:20Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > Cher. When she left Sonny, people were prediciting that no talent hanger-on would never work again. And vice versa… ---
**Author:** ![joebuck20](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@joebuck20](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joebuck20)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2010, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stuff-everybody-used-to-hate-and-now-love/547720/82 "2010-07-31T04:43:11Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > > [@joebuck20](#): > > > > Bill Murray. If you look at the type of low-brow comedies he was doing in the '90s - “Kingpin,” “The Man Who Knew Too Little,” Larger than Life," etc. - you would have a hard time believing that he would go on to become a well-respected actor that renowned filmmakers clamored to work with. > > Murray was a famous, established, well liked and respected actor, though. He’d had box office successes galore and was a talented actor, even if he hadn’t yet gotten an Oscar nomination. True, but a lot of those box office successes were in the '80s and I seem to recall that he was seen as kind of a has-been in the 90s (he did star in Groundhog Day in 1993, but it was only later that that became a cult favorite). It wasn’t until Rushmore that people began taking him seriously again and mentioning him in the same breath as DeNiro. ---
**Author:** ![pepperlandgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f17d59/32.png) [@pepperlandgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pepperlandgirl)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2010, 7:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stuff-everybody-used-to-hate-and-now-love/547720/83 "2010-07-31T07:38:00Z")
> [@fusoya](#): > > I don’t know how on earth Parks & Recreation got renewed, even despite having producers in high places. NOBODY liked the first season (I gave it 2 episodes, and even those were unbearable to sit through), and yet I keep hearing over and over how EVERYBODY loves the show by the end of Season 2. It got renewed because it’s really fucking funny. S1 reminds me a lot of The Office, insofar as it was finding its legs, but (to extend the metaphor) it really hit its stride in S2. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2010, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stuff-everybody-used-to-hate-and-now-love/547720/84 "2010-07-31T13:09:48Z")
Illuminatiprimus writes: \> . . . something like Lord of the Rings when first published was considered a \> terrible piece of work in an absolute sense . . . When was _The Lord of the Rings_ ever considered a terrible piece of work “in an absolute sense”? And what is an “absolute sense” anyway? There was a period from the time it was published (1954 and 1955) to the time (in 1964) when it came out in paperback when it was rather obscure. It got both good and bad reviews during that time. It didn’t sell a lot of books though. That article in _Cracked_ that’s linked to in post #63 is just wrong. As the paperback editions came out in the late 1960’s, it continued to get both good and bad reviews. The reviews had no effect on the sales of the book, which increased to the point that it’s the best-selling novel of all time. It continues to be controversial in academic circles, with large numbers of academics both loving and hating the book. I think that the OP is simply badly formulated. There are no things that went from everyone hating it to everyone loving it. The things that were once controversial are still controversial. ---
**Author:** ![Illuminatiprimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/illuminatiprimus/32/11520_2.png) [@Illuminatiprimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Illuminatiprimus)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2010, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stuff-everybody-used-to-hate-and-now-love/547720/85 "2010-07-31T13:13:22Z")
> [@Wendell\_Wagner](#): > > Illuminatiprimus writes: > > \> . . . something like Lord of the Rings when first published was considered a > \> terrible piece of work in an absolute sense . . . > > When was _The Lord of the Rings_ ever considered a terrible piece of work “in an absolute sense”? And what is an “absolute sense” anyway? There was a period from the time it was published (1954 and 1955) to the time (in 1964) when it came out in paperback when it was rather obscure. It got both good and bad reviews during that time. It didn’t sell a lot of books though. That article in _Cracked_ that’s linked to in post #63 is just wrong. Well consider me corrected then - sorry I spoke. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stuff-everybody-used-to-hate-and-now-love/547720.md?page=4)