Elvis hit theaters this summer, and while it looks spectacular and sounds sensational, the musical biopic has gotten mixed reviews and has been criticized for being too style-over-substance. The film is drenched in gloss and there's a sheen to it that few other films have, but the writing isn't its strongest point and it has neglected to reveal the most shocking parts of the singer's life.
But the pendulum tilts the other way too, and, sometimes, films have a magnificent premise with incredible dialogue, but the production value is nonexistent. Redditors have quickly noted which movies fall under the great writing/poor production column, and they bring up some almost forgotten could-have-been gems.
Pi (1998)
Pi has an impenetrable premise, especially when it comes to general audiences, as the film follows a mathematician pained by the fact that he can't figure out where a mysterious number comes from. The film is shot in black-and-white, is extremely slow-paced, and it looks completely flat, but the theme of a number theorist obsessed with order slowly losing control of reality is a great and lowkey hilarious idea.
Weekly_Signal6481 argues that the writing is, in fact, great, but the poor production is impossible to overlook. Pi was filmmaker Darren Aronofsky's directorial debut, and while he didn't establish his style until later on, the 1998 release is a fascinating first film. Aronofsky went on to become one of the most celebrated filmmakers of the 2000s, and, ironically, few other movies have such breathtaking cinematography as Black Swan does, and even fewer movies are as ambitious as Noah.
Star Wars (1977)
In what is a massively unpopular opinion, Writing_Gods argues that Star Wars has bad production value, but there isn't much of an argument there. For the time, Star Wars had a relatively modest production budget of $11 million (as reported by Box Office Mojo), and George Lucas managed to create one of the biggest and most satisfying cinematic events in history.
However, to the user's credit, a few of A New Hope's effects have become a little dated, such as the original lightsabers and the alien puppets. But other than that, the production of the 1977 movie is still as awe-inspiring today as it was 45 years ago.
The Bucket List (2007)
The Bucket List is one of the most sentimental movies of the 2000s and it's hard for any viewer to not become attached to Edward (Jack Nicholson) and Carter (Morgan Freeman), especially as Nicholson and Freeman give such powerful performances. But for all the jet-setting around and the ambitious bucket lists the characters have, that isn't exactly represented in its production.
Bruhmangoddman argues, "It is absolutely amazingly written and perfectly gripping. But I wasn't 'wowed' by any of the shots or visuals of the movie, save maybe for the last one on Mount Everest. A film like The Bucket List doesn't have to look like an Indiana Jones movie or be composed by John Williams, and these schmaltzy films don't have the budget for such things, but it's still one of the best 2000s feel-good movies.
Cube (1997)
While it isn't a popular movie, Cube has gained a huge cult following since its release, and that's largely down to how the movie isn't particularly exciting looking, despite having an exciting premise. MrX16 explains the movie as, "Individuals trapped in a bizarre and deadly labyrinth of cube-shaped rooms." The sci-fi horror is fantastically written, but it also looks incredibly rough due to its $350,000 micro-budget.
But given that the film is so surreal, unique, and interesting, the 1997 movie could benefit from a remake. According to Slash Film, an American remake of the Canadian movie is in development at Lionsgate, but as it has been "in development" for over 7 years, it looks like it's stuck in development hell.
Reservoir Dogs (1992)
This Reddit user thinks Quentin Tarantino's directorial debut, Reservoir Dogs, has poor production value, but admits, "Still works insanely well as a movie." However, just because the film isn't on the scale of Django Unchained or Inglourious Basterds doesn't mean it has bad production value.
A low budget doesn't always mean poor production quality either, and the film actually has incredibly impressive production value for its small $1.2 million budget (as per Box Office Mojo). The film is well shot, there's great costume design, and even though it's mostly shot in one location, it has a great set design too. Reservoir Dogs launched Tarantino's career, and that includes the way he is so particular over every tiny detail of the production.
Slipstream (1989)
There are some huge names attached to 1989's Slipstream both behind and in front of the camera. The film stars Mark Hamill fresh off his Star Wars success, Bill Paxton has a supporting role, it's produced by Gary Kurtz, who produced the Star Wars films, and it's directed by Steven Lisberger, who previously directed Tron.
But like the 1982 cult classic, Slipstream has a great concept that is let down by its underwhelming production value. Unlikely_Layer_2268 points to Slipstream as the best-written movie with the poorest production. The film is about a bounty hunter in a dystopian future that's now full of savages. And it's more relevant today than ever, as the story centers on how civilization has been swept away by climate change.
The Man From Earth (2007)
Kanute3333 pulls a deep cut from cinema history and calls out The Man from Earth for having great writing but terrible production value. The movie has a unique premise in which a university professor claims that he's a caveman who is actually 14,000 years old. However, for an idea so high concept, there are no well-known actors and the entire 90-minute movie takes place in and around one house.
It hardly comes as a surprise that the film doesn't look great, as it's another movie that had a minuscule budget of $200,000. But given that the whole movie is made up of intellectual conversations between members of faculty, it doesn't exactly need to look like 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Clerks (1994)
Clerks is a classic 1994 comedy, but, referring to director Kevin Smith, Joelluber notes, "I'm convinced he should've just been a screenwriter." Smith is the first to criticize his own work, and he's even said something similar about himself. In an interview printed in Film History, the filmmaker expressed, "The only thing I knew I was good at was writing."
In many ways, Clerks established Kevin Smith's film style even though the production of his films got much better. Based on the 1994 movie, it's clear that the writer-director didn't totally know how to frame a shot or shoot action, even a small-scale hockey game. But it's still full of hilarious banter between characters and his signature crude jokes.
Chuck & Buck (2000)
Laterdude thinks that Chuck & Buck's narrative suffers from poor production value, despite being based on a fantastic screenplay. The film follows the two titular childhood friends reuniting after years apart, but things become awkward when Chuck reminds Buck of their sexual encounters and confesses his love for him.
The Redditor actually has some production criticisms, noting, "One of the first films shot on digital video and it shows! Plus way too many close-ups." The film was marketed as a comedy, but it's way more of a dramedy and even has the tone of a psychological thriller. But while that was obviously a creative choice, the poor editing and framing are clearly a result of less-than-stellar filmmaking.