MovieChat Forums > Supernova (2000) Discussion > underated sci-fi classic and heres the r...

underated sci-fi classic and heres the reasons why

posted 16 years ago by mobstar1967
14 replies | jump to latest

first of all this film was outstanding,first and foremost the ensamble cast put together for this film was top notch,all parts played to presicion with no "weak links".second the visuals are outstanding,this was obviously a first rate production.third the story was excellent from opening to closing credits.

overall i thought this was a great story that had all of the proper ingredients for a sci-fi classic.

here's were the general public ends up rating this film at a 4+/10 when in fact i personaly rated it a 9/10.i would even accept a 7/10 but 4+/10 in unreasonable.ok heres my theory why this movie is underappreciated.

just like danny boyles "sunshine" released in 2007 another great sci-fi both of these films got low reviews with imdb users due to the following.U.S. audiences need to have a certain formula in order to appreciate anything in the sci-fi genre and these films did not have elaborate explosions,acid spitting aliens,predators with space gadgets,chestbuters or facehuggers nor did it have any type of colonial marines or commandos.

this was just a very well made film that happen to take place in deep space and the sci-fi geeks could not accept a film without any of the cameron/scott formulas(no disrespect to either of the directors as there films are wonderful)but today if ya got no acid spitting aliens and pulse rifles that shoot 1,000 rounds per minute the movie is doomed.

look at the films without aliens that were not sucsesful due to the fact that there was no alien threat in the last 8 years,RED PLANET,MISSION TO MARS,SUNSHINE and the list goes on but a dog with fleas with the worst possible acting like ALIEN VS PREDATOR REQUIEM continues to gross more and more money world wide and that movie is the WORST!!!!

overall i suggest anyone to revisit SUPERNOVA and i would bet you would be pleasantly suprised,thats if you can live without aliens and predators and colonial marines,and mindless explosions .

[–] JaffaCakes 16 years ago

When I first this movie in the cinema, I felt it was average.

But after watching it again I certainly give it 8-9 stars. I gave it 10 here hoping it'll raise it's ratings. Like you I feel it's been an unfair rating. It's an excellent movie. I enjoyed Walter Hill's other movie's also.

[–] moviecollector 16 years ago

watched this in theaters as well, & thought it was alright.

Now having seen the R-rated version several times, this movie is definitely under-rated & may be 1 of the better soft-core porn type of Sci-Fi movies.

[–] Together1618 16 years ago

I have learnt to reach my own conclusion about films despite what the critics say. The same goes with Emmy predicitons.

I enjoy watching Supernova. It's engaging, entertaining, original, well-performed with fantastic visual and audio effects.

[–] kersus 16 years ago

It's certainly true that the movies without a U.S. view struggle a lot more. If they'd have played up in a prologue how the USA ran the Earth and this was their medical ship while the bad guys were whatever the threat of the decade is - it'd do well.

Make it US centric in some way and you don't need to make a good movie.

Regardless, this is a classic and one that will stand the test of time.

[–] penguinmama88 16 years ago

For those of you who love the movie Twilight, here is a very different view of Carlyle Cullen! Smoking hawt! lol

[–] ceesco 14 years ago

"U.S. audiences need to have a certain formula in order to appreciate anything in the sci-fi genre and these films did not have elaborate explosions"

This is sheer idiocy. Utter bigotry. Profound stupidity. It's so mind-numbingly trite that it's almost - almost - too unfathomably brain-dead to address.

Sunshine did "poorly" because it ran in a low number of theatres and did not benefit from much media. It's still got a 7+ rating on IMDB, and 80% of ratings at Box Office Mojo for it are B or better, with 50% giving it an A. Want to tell us some more how U.S. audiences blah blah blah? Sunshine also cost substantially less to create than did Supernova, despite being made over half a decade later. Hell, most people never even HEARD of Sunshine when it was in theatres, and its widest opening was just 461 theatres, so it's not like a lot of people were seeing it at the ticket window.

Supernova? It did poorly because it's a bad movie. It's got bad in every metric. And if you weren't laughing at the entire last 15 minutes of the movie (at minimum), and you didn't think that was painfully bad, well ... man. It opened in 5 times the number of theatres as did Sunshine, had a production budget over twice the size, and a strong advertising budget - and it still only made $14 million.

[–] savagesteve13 14 years ago

And it still sucks every time. For god sakes it has Lou Diamond Phillips! That means it has jumped the shark even before it had hit theatres.

[–] gjieuh 13 years ago

underrated sci-fi flick, definitely deserves a higher score, but not a classic.
I agree with you though that it isn't what people are normally used to... even though most people have seen event horizon... but meh.

[–] juviejay 13 years ago

I thought it was underrated, too. But I don't think it's a classic. It does have some cool aspects--the alien device, the explanation of the alien device by Sweetie (best part of the movie, I thought), strong performances by Spader and Bassette...but it does have some cliche elements as well, ie., people trapped aboard a space ship being killed off one by one by a nearly invincible monster, a talking computer that runs the ship, a handy robot....

Also, I found it a bit annoying that the one actor who played the bad guy (can't recall his name, and I'm lazy) was doing his best Tom Cruise impersonation. Seriously, if you pay attention to his voice he sounds just like Cruise.

Anyway, I wish they'd have focused a bit more on the science and a little less on the action, but overall a pretty good film, I thought.

As for the other films mentioned in this thread--Sunshine, Mission to Mars, etc. I found them all a bit boring...hey, maybe I do like action...but not cliched action.

[–] mobstar1967 13 years ago

yea getting back to supernova i gotta admit that sci fi flicks that dont have aliens,chest busters or predators are not really held in high esteem...Supernova is outstanding without any of the sci fi cliches that we have come to get used to and expect over the past 35+ years..great film..
i would also say Danny Boyles Sunshine was quite under rated and probably for the same reasons as supernova...

a favor is gonna kill you faster than a bullet...
carlito brigante

[–] Sarpedon99 12 years ago

I totally agree. It's an enjoyable sci fi film

[–] tobisama 12 years ago

Saw it yesterday and I enjoyed a lot.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]