OU812 wrote: » Love that movie So dark. Brilliant flick. Two that I keep coming back to are Rock Star & Rock of ages. Neither should be regarded as high quality, but I love them.
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: » Juno. I think it got too hyped at the time and people turned against it. Plus a wise-cracking teen is off-putting to many. But Ellen Page was nominated for the Best Actress Oscar for it and I completely understand why. She’s finds the vulnerable note that prevents Juno from being totally obnoxious.
glasso wrote: » Highly annoying actress imo - even just annoying to look at before she starts speaking. This movie was her high point really and has disappeared into minor exposure since. Not that I'm complaining about that. Juno doesn't qualify for the concept of this thread really as it was well-reviewed / rated at the time.... I think that anything above about 55 or so on metacritic should be the exclusion bar for not being "under-rated" Juno for example got 81 which is a very high score for a movie.
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: » I think it belongs because people haven’t continued to speak well of it. The Metacritic reviews are from when it was released.
Sgt Hartman wrote: » Ironclad which stars James Purefoy, Paul Giamatti, Derek Jacobi and Lars "Ulfric Stormcloak " Kulich. I thought it was a great medieval action movie, loosely based on the siege of Rochester Castle.
Sofia Helpless Den wrote: » Pretty much all the star wars movies after the original trilogy are at worst pretty decent and some are very good but you would get a pain in your head listening to so many Star Wars fans saying everything after episode 6 is terrible. * 1-3 are excellent not denying they either. I’ve even heard one or two saying the mandolorian is rubbish and it is absolutely superb. Some just can’t be seen to compliment anything recent.
rapul wrote: » The Jacket, Adrian Brody at his best imo
Lockheed wrote: » Uncut Gems, watched it and enjoyed it so much that I was genuinely surprised to see the reviews.