MovieChat Forums > Supernova (2000) Discussion > I don't understand why this received a 4...

I don't understand why this received a 4.3...Opinions?

posted 14 years ago by zombiehax
12 replies | jump to latest

I caught this on Netflix right now and I was expecting this film to have around a five at the very least and a 7 at MOST.

If someone asked me to guess I would have said it had a 6.2 on IMDb.

Exactly why is this rated so low? Especially by today's standards of terrible films this movie was very entertaining.

I understand the difference between liking a movie and noticing a well made movie but this was quite entertaining.

The plot was rather simplistic. Certain characters lacked a bit of development, for example the couple that were trying to have a baby. I did not feel for them when they died.

But the special effects were great for its time and still hold up with a few blips along the road. The acting was fine, the makeup effects were fine. The plot was entertaining.

If I had seen this in the theater I wouldn't have regretted spending my 8 bucks.

It had tiny plot twists on the way, interesting concepts and was a fun ride.

I've read almost all the posts and I don't see any outstanding hatred for this film. Usually for a film rated so low almost every post speaks of how crappy the movie was.

So why is it that most people seem to not mind the movie? Yet rate it so low?

Fact: 31.5% of IMDb users wanted Avatar to win Best Picture.
Fact: 31.5% of IMDb users are idiots.

[–] savagesteve13 14 years ago

The movie was HORRIBLE. I'm amazed it got a 4.3.

[–] pentacleman 14 years ago

I've read enough of your comments to know that you're just another Grumpy Smurf, savagesteve. You're just another big, rolling ball of internet-fueled hatred; therefore, your opinions are irrelevant.

The movie wasn't bad; it just wasn't all that good, either. There was a lot of potential in this movie and its premise, but the writers and director appear to have dropped the ball. There should have been more character development, the villain should have been a bit more three-dimensional and yadda yadda. OTOH, the special effects were spot-on, the clumsy remote-control android made good sense as a tool to reduce endangerment of personnel, and the story didn't feel the need to explain the alien device to us all the way down to its nuts and bolts; they left an air of mystery to the device, which is exactly how people--characters and audience alike--should perceive a device that's completely alien in every sense of the word.

And showing Robin Tunney topless was a nice bonus. I knew I was a fan of hers (ever since The Craft) for a reason.... ^_^

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CannibalCraig 13 years ago

In my opinion, the film has a low score for several reasons. The film had potential, but the film was shelved by the producers for a number of years. When it was released, Walter Hill (director) used a pseudonym because he was very unhappy with the massive amount of re-editing that had taken place. For me, there was just a ton of lost potential here. Also, they should never have edited the film down for a PG-13 rating. I would liked to have seen what the un-edited material was, as this was suppose to be "Hellraiser in Outer Space".

I'm just a guy that likes horror flicks.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] konfou 9 years ago

I'm on the same boat as you. I would have guess a score 6-6.5 (consider the low scores on most scifi films), but 4.7 was bit unexpected. The effects indeed are really good even to this day. Maybe people watched this expecting something else?

[–] JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies 9 years ago

Opinions on it often seem influenced by knowledge of its troubled/disputational production history and the fact that a number of people involved with it disowned it. It's basically an "Alan Smithee" film.

None of that implies that the finished product isn't a good film, though. I like it quite a bit. It's not a 10 in my book. It's not the best thing I've ever seen. But it's a very enjoyable, kinda quirky, bigger-budget B-SciFi flick.

[–] Stigger 8 years ago

Well, you'll be happy to know it's up to 4.8 

[–] KawaiiKiwi 8 years ago

Just watched this and gave it a 6. I've watched so many worse movies with better scores. It wasn't super good but it was entertaining. I'm really surprised it has such a low score.