10 Classic Movies That The Critics Originally Hated

Film critics are paid to do the job they have for one reason: they make mistakes less frequently than everybody else who has an opinion on film. All that talk of "everybody should make their own mind up" and "everyone's a critic" surely becomes moot when you hold a review written by Roger Ebert next to that of the average IMDb commenter. The film critic earned that position by being a trusted guide, whereas the average viewer, to put it plainly, just hasn't. Still, no one is infallible - even the trusty movie critic gets it wrong on occasion. When critics across the board get it wrong, though? That's another deal entirely. Put it down to the danger of groupthink, or the movie under review simply being too ahead of its time for the critics circle to fully appreciate it, but sometimes movie critics come together to make almighty errors in judgement. Whereas most of our movie classics were well-liked or at least admired from the start, there are some that initially didn't impress those reviewers at all. For this list, there was only one rule: the film that critics hated then but love now must be the same version that screened in cinemas back in the day they received a dire critical response (so no Blade Runner and its superior director's cut, and no Once Upon a Time in America and its restored edit). With that out of the way, here are ten movies that are now embraced as classics, despite critics originally hating them. 10) Predator What they said then: Arnold Schwarzenegger, in the jungle, fighting an alien with a cloaking device - what's not to love about Predator? Well, back in 1987 - when the film was originally released - the critics decided on 'everything.' The New York Times called it "grisly and dull," whilst the Los Angeles Times proclaimed it was "arguably one of the emptiest, feeblest, most derivative scripts ever made as a major studio movie." What they say now: A classic sci-fi action movie, one that the word "dull" rarely comes within spitting distance of anymore. Entertainment Weekly recently declared it the 22nd best action movie ever made, while IGN decided it was the 13th best. Outside of the Terminator franchise, Predator is also probably considered the strongest movie that Arnie ever starred in. 9) It's A Wonderful Life What they said then: Considering it's virtually unavoidable around the holiday season, it's strange to think that It's A Wonderful Life originally was seen by next to no one in theaters. And some of the critics wish they'd never even made the effort: The New York Times gagged at the film's "sentimentality" and dismissed it as "most optimistic and facile." Director Frank Capra lamented that the critical response at the time was universally negative. What they say now: A forever-on-at-Christmas classic that represents the best of a simpler time in cinema. It's sentimental, sure, but perhaps a lack of sentimentality in modern movies is what makes It's A Wonderful Life seem so special today. It's a feel-good classic, and the American Film Institute even has it as the 11th greatest film ever made. 8) Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas What they said then: Terry Gilliam's boozy, hazy adaptation of Hunter S. Thompson's gonzo novel landed with a thud in 1998. The Washington Post wrote that "it tells no story at all," the Guardian criticized the film for its apparent "tedium," and USA Today called Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas "simply unwatchable." Which is sort of what Gilliam - who spoke of hoping for "outrage" - wanted, so it's not all bad. What they say now: To be fair to critics at the time, they couldn't see into the future to know that they were taking a Johnny Depp on good form for granted. Fear and Loathing does still divide, but the critical consensus seems to grow more positive with every passing year. It's become, like so many Gilliam projects, a cult film, praised for its good bits rather derided for its bad. 7) Heaven's Gate What they said then: Heaven's Gate was such a huge flop on release that it basically singlehandedly bankrupted United Artists. Part of the reason audiences weren't interested was because there was such bad buzz on arrival - Pauline Kael declared the film "distant and vaporous." The New Times called it "an unqualified disaster" whilst Roger Ebert dismissed it as "the most scandalous cinematic waste I have ever seen." What they say now: This one's only just very recently come in for re-assessment, but in the last few years Michael Cimino's epic western has developed a much warmer reputation. Critics lauded the film on its 2012 re-release, whilst Time Out London called it the 12th greatest western ever made. Still probably not worth the bankruptcy of UA, but a good film nonetheless. 6) Barry Lyndon What they said then: A handful of critics embraced Barry Lyndon, Stanley Kubrick's country-hopping period epic, on its 1975 release (one of the best that year, said Gene Siskel). Most, however, were just bored. Contemporary film critic Tim Robey summed up the response thusly: "Critics were itching to rail against the perceived coldness of Kubrick's style, the film's self-conscious artistry and slow pace." What they say now: Well, we know Martin Scorsese is one who's always loved Barry Lyndon, at least; it's just taken time for most everyone else to catch up. Roger Ebert eventually came to call it "one of the most beautiful films ever made," Time named it one of their top 100 movies of all-time, and Sight & Sound followed suit. Supposedly critics have become more forgiving of 'boring' films. 5) Bonnie And Clyde What they said then: Some did love Arthur Penn's crime biopic at the time; however, in 1967, the year of Bonnie and Clyde's release, the film was somewhat controversial in its approach to form and taboo material. Some critics took issue with its apparent glorification of violence (Newsweek wrote that the film was a "squalid shoot-em-up for the moron trade"), and others with its structure ("uneven" wrote Variety). What they say now: In '67, legendary critic Bosley Crowther began a campaign against film violence based on his disgust towards Bonnie and Clyde; nowadays, the film seems relatively tame. Also, stylistically quite adventurous and something of a turning point for American cinema - so much so that the American Film Institute now considers it to be the 42nd best film ever made. 4) Metropolis What they said then: "A technical marvel with feet of clay," cried the New York Times. "Unconvincing and overlong," yawned The New Yorker. "Foolishness, cliché, platitude, and muddlement about mechanical progress and progress in general...quite the silliest film," read the review in the Times. That last one was written by HG Wells, just FYI. What they say now: One of the monoliths of silent cinema, and a science fiction movie that's been more influential perhaps than any other. 1927 may not have appreciated Metropolis, but critics of 2015 are in awe of it - Roger Ebert for one claimed it was "more powerful today than when it was made." It came in 35th in the most recent Sight & Sound critics and filmmakers poll, just behind... 3) The General What they said then: Film criticism in 1926 - far from being the open and continuously flourishing field it is today - wasn't too accommodating of Buster Keaton's The General. Variety called it "far from funny," the New York Times wrote that "the fun is not exactly plentiful" and the Los Angeles Times declared that "it drags terribly." What they say now: Buster Keaton's most accomplished work, and a milestone in movie comedy, The General is now in its 89th year and the critical consensus just keeps getting warmer. It was one of Roger Ebert's favorites, and in the 2012 Sight & Sound poll it made 34th place. It also contains some of Keaton's most bats**t stunts, which make most modern stars look like damn cowards. 2) Night Of The Hunter What they said then: Critical and audience reception to 1955's Night of the Hunter was so poor that director - normally actor - Charles Laughton decided never to make another movie. The acting - particularly from Robert Mitchum - was generally praised, while some admitted the film was "interesting," but words like "pretentious" and "inexperienced" were used to describe Laughton's style. What they say now: A great, weird noir, from a rare actor who may have actually had more to give from behind the camera than in front of it. Beautifully composed in stark monochrome, and with a strange, hypnotic vibe, Night of the Hunter has since influenced so many backwards tales of Americana. The critics were right the first time on one thing though: Mitchum is incredible. 1) The Shining What they said then: In fairness, you could fill this list with Kubrick films. Lolita, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Barry Lyndon, Eyes Wide Shut - all were met with a mixed or tepid response, before critical consensus slowly changed to praise. Perhaps none of Kubrick's movies got quite as frosty reception as The Shining, however. Variety, for one, said it destroyed "all that was so terrifying" about Stephen King's novel. What they say now: One of the greatest horror movies of all time, and a strong contender for being one of the best movies of all time. Critics and audiences now generally agree that The Shining is a masterpiece of slow-burn terror, headed up by Jack Nicholson simultaneously at his most manic and charismatic. And to hell with what King says - this is better than the book.

10 Classic Movies That The Critics Originally Hated

7) Heaven’s Gate